Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Adult Beginners Forum Youtube Cover Removed for Copyright Infringement

I got a notice today from Youtube that one of my piano/vocal covers was removed for Copyright Infringement. I have posted many covers of popular songs on YouTube over the last couple of years and never had this happen before.

Since many of us here on ABF post covers on YouTube I am curious if anyone else had this experience and if so, what, if anything, did you do about it?

Among my YouTube Pianist friends, yes, I've heard complaints of this occurring. One lady from Spain that I know (very talented pianist and composer), had this problem with Sony records. She was playing on her own digital piano (it wasn't even an acoustic), and got a copyright infringement violation from YouTube on behalf of Sony records.

From what I've seen, if your recording isn't available in the "public domain", you're more likely to get a copyright infringement violation. Because of this, I went back to a couple of my daughter's videos and listed where the sheet music came from. Perhaps you'll want to list in your description (if you haven't already), the song-writer's name and the composer's name who wrote the arrangement on your piano accompaniment, etc...

I hope this helps, and sorry for what happened.

even if you say where it comes from you can still be taken down: the account of a really good guitarist that had several hundred original arrangements of well known songs has been taken down over a year ago and it hasn't come back yet (despite a lot of users campaigning in his favour).

Another user that has some excellent piano tutorials for original arrangements of songs had a couple of them recently taken down as well and said that apparently it takes only between 3-5 reported infringements for youtube to completely remove your account.

I think the only 'safe' music genres to play on youtube nowadays are classical and jazz, for everything else the music labels are definitely on the lookout for videos which use their songs in any way shape or form.

I read in a discussion board on youtube about someone having a video of the garage band he was in while he was in college in the early 70's taken down for copyright infringement because they were playing covers. I believe in the origional artists getting their recognotion and royalties and I don't believe in downloading things for free that are easily available for sale just because you can get them for free, but there comes a point when I wonder whatever happened to imitation being the sincerest form of flattery. No one is going to mistake any of us for the "real thing" and the record companies aren't going to lose their fortunes because some amatuers want to share their accomplishments on youtube.

It is perfectly legal to play a "cover" in a public performance BUT if you do you are required to pay a small fee to the songwriter's agency so that they can forward payment. to the song writer. It is the same on u-tube as if you were on stage except the u-tube is even more "public" than playing at a local bar (where you'd likey never get caught.)

Here are a couple good links on the subject.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Performance_rights_organisation

http://www.ascap.com/licensing/licensingfaq.html

Agreed - the cover in question was my pitiful rendition of a song by the Turtles (Happy Together) that was released in 1967. The band broke up 40 years ago. I realize that Alley Music Corp (the aggrieved party) is still entitled to their intellectual property but it seems kind of pathetic to me.

By the way, a search of Happy Together Cover on YouTube yields 2,570 hits so apparently I'm not alone in my fondness for this tune. I deleted my video.

omg haven't had that happened to me yet since I just started youtube.. Maybe I should go back to photobucket lol.. Seems safer

Hey, Ladypayne - stay with youtube. I only say this because every time I tried to watch your vids on photobucket, it crashed my computer. Don't know if anyone else had this problem, but it certainly bummed me out.

I'm sorry to hear that, Bill. I'm guessing it's more of a problem with popular music. But I'm surprised that they would aggressively enforce a cover. I see lots of videos removed that are just pieces ripped from the CDs with a slide show attached, and I can understand why the music companies would want to be vigilant about those.

This is a fascinating one, because if you perform live it is actually the venue's problem to be licensed for the intellectual property. By analogy, YouTube is the venue......

That's my understanding, too. I suppose youtube hasn't ponied up to BMI and ASCAP because of the overwhelming number of videos they'd have to track and pay for. Unlike your local bar or pub with live music a couple of nights a week. Altho even that can be almost prohibitive. Or maybe they'd also have to pony up to other-than-US royalty entities, too.

I wonder why they haven't taken down the other several thousand videos once one of them was flagged? Surely they can use their own search button

Cathy

I wonder if they'd have to pay mechanical rights (the right to reproduce as a hard copy) as well as performance rights?

Cathy

I wonder if they leave the crappy performances alone and just go after the good ones. If you think about it, if they are worried that someone may want to listen to your version of a tune in lieu of the original, you must be pretty good.

There may be a warped compliment in there somewhere!

I certainly enjoy Bill's covers, he's good. On the other hand, while Alan Gordon has passed away, I'm sure Gary Bonner enjoys getting royalties for Happy Together. I doubt he worries much about Bill, though.

They seem pretty indiscriminate about what they go after. I made a (very bad) practice video using the Music Minus One (MMO) orchestra as my accompaniment. Because I was just learning the piece, I had to slow the orchestra part way down. That video was still flagged as some sort of infringement on Sony. I'm not even sure if MMO is a subsidiary of Sony.

I had thought that a 10 minute use of some music whose sole purpose was for accompaniment would fall under fair use (no financial gain; small excerpt for artistic expression), but apparently, it does not. Strangely, my infraction seems to be a bigger problem in Germany than elsewhere. According to Youtube, I don't have to remove the video yet, but people in Germany will be spared of my blasphemous attempt at Beethoven. Perhaps that is just as well.

Bummer, Bill.

I saw an interesting article a while ago on that viral wedding dance video and why it never was pulled:

http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2009...hris-brown-monetize-wedding-dance-video/

It's too bad more studios and copyright holders don't take advantage of this advertising technique.


Bill, it looks like it's time you started playing some Chris Brown.

I'm no lawyer, but I have an interest in this issue, and this is my perspective on it: Youtube/Google do automated searches for copyright violations. They cast a very wide net. If you posted the Turtles playing Happy Together, they would have a legitimate claim. You posted your performance. Alley Music Corp does not have a copyright on your performance. You automatically do. They could say that they are owed an ASCAP fee. On general principals, since it was probably an automated action anyway, I would file a request with Youtube to have the video reinstated. At least a live person would look at it then. I would say that you reserve all rights to your performance, which was done for non-commercial purposes. At least, that is what I would do, and what I have known others to do. It may not be worth the trouble for you -- just my $0.02 :-)

Not a recorded performance. The copyright holder "owns" the music. Cover it live in a bar - no problem. Put it on You Tube - problem.

I really do feel for the position of copyright holders. One might think it petty to yank amateur performances on You Tube, but where to you draw the line? It's a tough spot to be in, and some recording companies are more vigilant than others.

I don't really understand why youtube goes through the trouble of deleting amateur performances on music covers but they leave full length movies up. Granted, they are in like 10 or 12 parts, but there's definitely a number of featured full length films on youtube that go undetected. So I wonder if these people that put these movies use some round about way so that the vids don't get deleted besides saying I Don't own this vid etc..

actually even if you cover it live in a bar you still have to do the paperwork so royalties are paid (or at least you need to do this in some European countries, I haven't ever played in a cover band live in North America). It wouldn't surprise me if bar owners even here have to pay some sort of licensing fee for 'live music' and have to give the setlist to ASCAP/BMI/... for royalty distribution.

It ought to be possible to do the same on youtube, I am sure a lot of people would be totally fine with a microtransaction of $1/$2 to be able to post their cover of xyz, as of now there appear to be no legal way to share your performance of copyrighted material even if you were willing to pay to be able to do so.