YouTube removing audio from clips using copyrighted sources
Rather than pulling the entire video offline, YouTube is now dealing with offending videos by muting their audio.
So, you've just finished your latest video mash-up, mixing clips of Jill Sobule's 1995 song I Kissed a Girl with the music from today's Katy Perry hit of the same name. Clever, no? Except a day after uploading to YouTube, you're not getting the number of views you expected. Checking in on your clip, there's no longer any audio - there goes the whole point of your project! You might just have fallen victim to YouTube's latest weapon in the war against all things piracy.
There's always been a tug-of-war between YouTube and its uploaders over the hosting of copyrighted material. It seems like every time the site has to pull down a video due to a copyright claim being raised against it, a new copy of the video pops up, every-so-slightly edited or with a different title, hoping to keep the clip online for just a little while longer.
Now it looks like the company is trying out a new strategy, specifically one to deal with the unauthorized use of music. We all can agree that uploading a full music video is a clear no-no, but many contributors have been getting by with work-arounds like uploading slideshows of still images, set to a musical track. Sometimes the abuses are more blatant and contain no original content at all, just displaying a single still image or a sheet of lyrics while the copyrighted song plays. If it doesn't look like the uploader put any work into the clip, there's probably not going to be an argument for fair use, as it's just re-presenting what other people already made.
YouTube is now dealing with this type of infringement by muting the video's audio and displaying a short message explaining the site's copyright policy. We're guessing that YouTube's going this route because it's become so easy to automatically identify songs; there are apps for several cell phones that let you do the same thing. All YouTube needs to do is feed its videos' audio through that kind of system and flag the results.
We're a bit concerned for how this is going to affect the company's relationship with its contributors. While many of us wouldn't shed a tear over the loss of fan-made slideshows of the Twilight cast set to a song from the film's soundtrack, these kind of clips are the service's bread-and-butter. They're also just about the simplest kind of content new users can create and upload.
If you're just getting into digital video and start off with some projects like this, only to keep having your videos' audio removed, wouldn't that put a serious damper on your future relationships with the site? Would you keep generating content for them to use (and make money off of) if you weren't sure it would be published in its entirety?
This story around the web:
- Trusted sources:
YouTube begins silencing music videos [TechRadar: All Latest Feeds]
-
YouTube Now Mutes Videos With Unauthorized… [Mashable!]
-
YouTube Muting Copyrighted Songs - AppScout [appscout.com]
-
MediaFuturist: YouTube Now Mutes Videos With… [mediafuturist.com]
-
YouTube Brings Back Silent Movies -… [podcastingnews.com]
Get more information on topics relating to this story:
- Related company news:
- YouTube
- Related glossary terms:
- Streaming video
- Related devices and services:
- YouTube
Notable netbooks by size
Comments (11)
Add a comment Inappropriate or promotional comments may be removed.
rose (3:27 PM on Wed Jan 14, 2009)
How is anyone "stealing" by making videos and uploading them?
And people will just find somewhere else to submit fanmade videos if YouTube doesn't want people using their site anymore. Dailymotion and myvideo.de have tons of full videos and I don't hear complaints about them.
Stephen Schenck (10:25 AM on Thu Jan 15, 2009)
"Stealing"? Who said "stealing"?
WTF (11:41 PM on Sun Jan 18, 2009)
I don\'t get it. I pay for the CD. I use music on that CD for a personal video I uploaded onto youtube and now they mute it and say it\'s copyright infringement? I\'m not making money off of the video and the music is paid for. So how greedy can Warner be? What next? Only listen to your music with headphones because if anyone else hears it without paying then it\'s copyright infringement?
Anonymous (2:12 AM on Fri Jan 23, 2009)
You tube is for presonal use not for misic share. I agree Stop the music and other copyrighted stuff. It's all to simple to rip music from a video and pass it on. So I say Keep music alive so people have to BUY tracks rather than seteal them.
P in the UK
Renee M
(3:59 PM on Tue Jan 27, 2009)
I think it's ridiculous. In my opinion, people using songs in videos provides one very important thing that these industry execs seem to be missing: free advertisement.
I made a video using a Staind song, for example, and had people say to me that they loved the music and went out and bought the CD.
Removing the audio from videos on youtube is only going to cause people to find other ways to share their creativity. And, as an unfortunate side, it makes the music companies look greedy and short-sighted. I'm not at all impressed by this latest stunt of theirs. (and no, I have yet to have any audio removed from my videos, so this is not coming from any kind of personal grievance.)
Anonymous (10:30 AM on Tue Feb 10, 2009)
I have to agree with what Renee has said. Because of songs being uploaded to slideshows I have downloaded and PAID to download TONS of new songs I never would have known about. Because of YouTube I have discovered artists and songs I never would have known about.
I do agree that uploading music videos and tv shows is wrong, but what is the harm in uploading a video of someone's pet or their vaction trip set to a song.
Big thumbs down to the music industry.
Anonymous (4:57 PM on Wed Jan 28, 2009)
This is a good thing. It protects copyright holders, while providing a stimulus for YouTube users to create original content, instead of riding someone else's coattails.
Jonathan Fox
(9:11 AM on Sun Mar 15, 2009)
I agree. It's heavy handed and another example of the greed of the record companies. I filmed a 40 second clip of my motorbike with some new lights on. I used a snippet of music from 'The Dark Knight'. I have paid for this music and was using it in this short clip because I don't have a full orchestra at my disposal and never will.
Often I have posted a video and someone has asked what the music is. As has been said before, it is free advertising. I have bought music from iTunes on the strength of hearing it in YouTube clips. There are a raft of better video sites out there such as Vimeo and Metcafe. I don't NEED YouTube.
I have no problem with blatant ripping of music videos or entire songs being removed from YouTube but when users add a snippet of a song to create a mood for their film then I don't see the harm.
As per usual the bean counters are in control and lets face it... when did you ever see a creative accounts department.
Anonymous (10:27 PM on Mon May 11, 2009)
I dont see why the accounts dept cares. Who goes on to youtube to listen to music rather than say, downloading the torrent. Single songs being on youtube makes no difference to their profits. Things like torrents do yeah, but not youtube, its just control freakery.
Anonymous (10:24 PM on Mon May 11, 2009)
Stealing is taking without permission with the owner losing out. THIS IS NOT STEALING, they lose nothing! Its just more exposure.
And no, i cannot agree that uploading a music video is a no-no, THEY PROMOTIONAL AND ARE FREE TO WATCH ANYWAY, THATS THE POINT IN THEM!!!!!!!
Peter Edwards (10:26 AM on Tue May 19, 2009)
I was very excited when youtube allowed the likes of myself and thousands others to upload creative short films, now they have muted the sound on most of mine and feeel let down, It took me many hours of editing and is new rendered useless, (pardon the pun) I will not use Youtube to the degree that I once did,