Thinking Of Joining AdRev

[Art Munson]

I was speaking recently with a long time composer and very early visitor to MLR. He informed me that he had made the plunge, signed up with AdRev and, by extension, YouTube Content ID. I was surprised as we have all been aware of the problematic nature of YouTube Conent ID. Conflicts might occur when clients purchase licenses from RF sites, upload their videos to YouTube and get hit with a Copyright infringement notice.

This particular composer claims that he has collected quite a bit of money from AdRev. In fact, much more than from one notably large RF library he has been with for many years! He also says that there have been no issues with sales and conflicts.

I e-mailed AdRev about the potential for conflicts and here is their response.

“We’ll assign your music a manual review policy, meaning we won’t automatically claim videos using your music. Any video that does contain music will go into a potential claims queue, where our team will verify by hand if the video owner has a license or not. If they cannot prove they have purchased rights to use your content, we’ll claim for you.”

So, has the time come? I did set up an account at AdRev and thinking of seriously going this route.

What do you all think?

[Art Munson]

Bump

[Musicmatters]

I have already dipped my feet in there. I signed up about 6 months ago ago with about 50 tracks. It takes about three months to start seeing any results at all. I have made some earnings so far, i estimate that at the current rate i will be making about 60 to 80 per month but it may keep going up. Just make sure you pull out the same tracks from the libraries that do not approve. No problems with any clients so far who have purchased the same tracks from libraries that do not mind. Cheers

[Tbone]

Sounds pretty interesting.

So any video that uses your music, which is made by a client that purchased a license for that music – those videos will be whitelisted and unaffected? If that’s feasible it does sound very interesting.

I guess this would only work for non-exclusive music, since exclusive deals involved signing over some rights and some publishers probably use Adrev already.

[Art Munson]

So any video that uses your music, which is made by a client that purchased a license for that music – those videos will be whitelisted and unaffected?

They would be white listed once it was determined that they had a valid license.

When I signed up they asked what sites I was selling music on and I listed them. I imagine that’s why they sent me the “manual review” procedure blurb.

[woodsdenis]

Art, what would you do with the sites that prohibit AdRev.

[Art Munson]

So far I’m clear on the ones that sell well, which would be my main concern. Taking this slow to see if it’s at all doable.

[Tbone]

Just to confirm: you can submit by track right? So you could leave all exclusive tracks off and just send Adrev other ones?

[Musicmatters]

sure, you can submit whatever you like. I get the feeling that this will grow fast in the next few years so it is good to position yourself.

[Art Munson]

I get the feeling that this will grow fast in the next few years so it is good to position yourself.

I also think it’s a good way to lay claim to our music. There will ultimately be only a few worthwhile places where video producers will want to post their projects on the Internet. In some ways that may have already happened with YouTube, Vimeo, Facebook, etc. They are big players and it’s in their bests interests to keep everything clean.

[Musicmatters]

Just to remind everybody that there are other sites besides AdRev doing the same thing, although AdRev is the biggest player. It may be worth your while to do some research.

[Alan]

I came across this while doing some AdRev research: I haven’t gotten through all of it yet, but it a an interesting read showing two very different takes of AdRev.
https://audiojungle.net/forums/thread/video-producer-who-will-not-be-buying-your-music-ever-again/152183

[Art Munson]

I came across this while doing some AdRev research: I haven’t gotten through all of it yet, but it a an interesting read showing two very different takes of AdRev.

I didn’t read all of the comments but some of those commenters are big music sellers on AJ and they are just trying to protect their music.

[Music1234]

Hi Art, do not be swayed by that long debate Alan posted. That thread is ancient history. Video Producers once were disgruntled about getting ads on their videos and claims filed. The ADREV ship sailed with thousands of composers and tracks on board 3 to 5 years ago. Video Producers have defense mechanisms in place to deal with their YT videos at this point.

Music publishers and libraries can squash complaints from customers fast and ads get removed fast. ADREV is not a money making mechanism unless one of your tunes ends up in a video with 100 million views and the monetization goes to you. Use it more or less to spy and get info/ data on how your music is being used in YOUTUBE. You will make some extra spending money quarterly. Many of us were oversold on ADREV.

I have no regrets. I have a portion of my catalog in there and I do make quarterly spending money. It is neat to see how people use your music on YT videos. Don’t sweat it. I have had one customer write to me asking to get an ad removed. It was not a big scene nor did anger flair up. Video Producers probably know how to deal with ADREV by now. Anyone with any kind of YOUTUBE video uploading experience knows about adrev and other services like ADREV I’d think.

My advice would be to start with 50 to 100 tracks, then see what happens in 3 months…then add more. I would not stress out about it and I would not even worry about libraries that disallow it because it just has not been that problematic for anyone. One final thought, I do not add my latest music to adrev simply because I am more interested putting energy into selling licenses. That is where we make our money.

[Art Munson]

Thanks for the input Music1234!

[Author]

Posts