When you upload a video to YouTube the video and audio “fingerprint” of the new video is checked against a database. If there is a match with either the video or audio fingerprints then this is flagged as a Content ID match. YouTube will then include adverts with the video and if the match is a music track YouTube will also

• include a link below the video to iTunes to allow viewers to buy the music
• the audio may be muted in one or more countries as per the policy defined by the owner of the music track

Since the audio is muted as per a policy defined by the owner and that revenues from the adverts are passed onto the owner I had assumed that this implied there is approval from the copyright owner. I believe that this is a common understanding but I now know to my cost this is not correct.

Content ID matches do not imply copyright approval.

A few days ago I was shocked to receive a Copyright Infringement from YouTube. Evergreen Social Media Associates had sent a formal “Copyright Infringement Notice” as per the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 (DMCA) to YouTube about a video with Supertramp background music. This music had been correctly identified by YouTube’s Content ID system and had adverts and iTunes links. The video and background music was therefore being monetised and muted as per the content owner’s policy so why had I recieved a copyright infringement?

My conclusion after a lot of Googling is that

• The content owner is either not the copyright owner or is not the only representative of the copyright owner
• The Copyright owner or a representative of the copyright owner can send a “Copyright Infringement Notice” totally independently of the content owner’s policy
• The content owner can send a “Copyright Infringement Notice” against a video even if then video is monetised as per their own policy

In other words if your video includes copyright material it is possible to get a copyright infringement even if your video has a correct Content ID match. The only way to guarantee that you will not get a copyright infringement notice is to not use copyright material.

I have always been puzzled why YouTube warns users not to use copyright material but if you do use copyright material it monetises the video. This seems inconsistent – if YouTube does not want you to use copyright material then it would detect it and instantly delete the video. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 (DMCA) protects YouTube from copyright infringment liability provided that videos which are complained about are withdrawn immediately. DMCA also defines the “three strikes” rule. So YouTube is compliant with DMCA. As a user it would be nice to be given 24hrs to delete the video before recording a “strike” against my account.

I now have one copyright infringement (strike) logged on my YouTube account which as far as I can find out will never expire. And if I get three infringements at any time in years / decades to come then my YouTube account will be closed.

I have a small library of Royalty Free Music where I have bought the licence to allow me to use the music as background music in videos. This is the only music I will use in the future to ensure that I do not lose my YouTube account. I would recommend other YouTube users to adopt the same policy.

I am not a lawyer so the content of this post is simply my recommendation based on personal experience. The following pages were useful in writing this post:

• Electronic Frontiers Foundation – Guide To YouTube Removals
• What is YouTube’s Content ID tool?
• Discussion about other videos that have been disabled at Evergreen Social Media’s request which all use Supertramp music
• Supertramp representative indicates Supertramp are not involved with blocking videos on YouTube