Every few days, my robots generate a compilation video of DNA Lounge's upcoming shows, comprised of a ~20 second clip from a music video by each of the upcoming bands, like so. It gets uploaded to our various social media accounts.Currently, three of the bands we have booked are apparently wholly-owned subsidiaries of multinational media conglomerates who would prefer that we not promote their live concerts.
So my morning ritual for the last couple of weeks has been to paste this into the Youtube copyright claim dispute form:
DNA Lounge is a concert venue. This video contains extremely brief clips from videos of bands who are booked to perform live at this venue in the coming weeks.
These bands are putting on live shows on our stage. We are using these videos to get people to show up and pay money to the bands who made them.
This is literally why music videos were invented.
This is the seventh time I have submitted this same dispute, with no response. Apparently your robots are going to do this every single time I post a video. That's fabulous.
Previously, previously, previously, previously, previously, previously.
I've never understood why music videos are so locked down. They're basically a fucking advert, if you really care that much, maybe limit it to a low bit rate, or just mono, but generally, someone watching a music video is slightly more likely to give your band money, why would you want to stop that?
Lawyers gotta get paid somehow, man. Have you seen what forced arbitration has done to their job prospects? These days if you want to suck at the corporate teat you don't need to pass the bar.
thanks to youtube, music videos are now monetized content.
The greatest deal MTV ever made was convincing record companies to give away music videos for free.
audiovisual is richer than audio; it's like watching a movie promoting the radio play. Or sitting through a symphony promoting a podcast. Or watching Prince at the DNA Lounge to convince you to eat at the restaurant; a show and a dinner is just backwards.
it's taken the music industry a while to figure that much out. how do the cost of music videos vs the songs they're promoting compare these days?
It was never "for free", it was straight up radio payola, same as since the 50s.
But hey, you've convinced me that it's right and proper that they're blocking my videos I guess?
There are
bandsmultinational media conglomerates which do this exact thing, making the audio essentially unrippable. So maybe that's the key? Some sort of "vintage" filter might defeat the filters. Fight stupid with stupid.It only seems fair that you write a robot to write and send the appeal every morning. Of course that’s probably against their TOS.
Which flavour of YouTube's bullshit is this? The on-upload pattern-matching known as ContentID, or some third party filing a "copyright takedown" either manually or with their own overzealous pattern-matching machine?
This is why we need a three strikes rule. Three bogus take downs and your take down rights are suspended for 30 days.
I've seen people flip the videos horizontally to avoid ContentID.
Maybe your bots could do that?
They match on both audio and video. I don’t have the time or motivation to go down those Whack-a-Mole ratholes.
Just play them backwards!
Aren't you committed to playing whack-a-mole until you give up on YouTube? At some point they'll start inserting ads without your permission too.
Thanks for your helpful insight.
Sorry. I mention it because I only recently started to see YT embeds as reserved billboard space to be monetized later. Still disturbed by this and haven't achieved the wry acceptance of an industry insider.
Welcome to Algorithm World. Where companies hide their incompetence behind incompetent algorithms.