An artist called TheFatRat tweeted this:
ARE YOU ****ING KIDDING ME YOUTUBE?!?! THIS IS MY SONG
— TheFatRat (@ThisIsTheFatRat) December 12, 2018
His own song was claimed by another company as if he was infringing on their copyright. So, basically, they will get all the revenue from this song and it looks as well that he has appealed this claim and that it has been rejected. From my YouTuber perspective, this is 100% accurate, this is something that happens almost on the daily. Gus Johnson, another YouTuber, made a great video recently sharing his frustration about this issue:
(…) This is a big important issue that we need to talk about (…) this claim was manually claimed, not even the automatic detection, as containing stuff from EMI Music Publishing. This is not an issue that I am new to at all, because, as you may know, in the past I have had big videos also claimed by that music industry’s.
This has happened to me as well, where I literally just sang the song Despacito and I lost all revenue over the video. This guy literally just played a song on a paper towel dispenser, no lyrics, just drumming and rapping on a paper towel dispenser. Now, as it turns out, even your own material can get copyrighted.
This really shows how easy it is to use YouTube’s current system and claim everything, even when most of the time no music at all appears. Some of the time, commentary channels that are talking about other videos that are using a half second of copyrighted music and these companies are also claiming the entire commentary video.
How does this work? You get a Content ID claim, which basically means that the video will stay up (which is nice), but they will claim all the revenue from the video from that point. All you can do is appeal this dispute and say that it was fair use or that it was an error. Then, they will review it again. YouTube does not come in and say who’s right here, it’s entirely up to the company to decide whether this is fair use or not, which leads to it being abused most of the time. I have had even content that doesn’t even feature the song that they claim was being used in the video. The whole situation is ridiculous.
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t mind losing the revenue in the video (I mean, yes I do), but I’ll survive. It’s not that big of a deal, the problem I have with this is that the revenue goes directly into these companies that don’t care about copyright, they just want to make a quick buck, and that you’re ruining the ecosystem of the Internet, you might make some money now, but people are just going to stop using any form of music in any video on YouTube. The end result of this is that less music gets shared, and less people are drawn to that artist. Why music companies and records don’t see that, is just beyond me.
YouTube themselves talk about this in their argument against Article 13. They talk about the Drake song’s meme where people would dance outside the car. That’s a meme that I didn’t review because I knew my video would just get copyrighted, even though it is a review. I can’t wait for Article 13 to make YouTube even more annoying.
YouTube has a tool now that’s in beta where it lets you edit out parts of the video, so if you are a YouTuber that has this issue, try out YouTube Beta. I’m glad that that’s in place now, it certainly made my life ten times. However, YouTube needs to have a serious talk with these companies about what’s right and wrong for them to do. If we, as YouTubers, get three copyright strikes, we lose our channel; but these companies can just keep claiming and claiming and face no repercussions. There’s no fairness.