# Muserk Claimed the Rights on YouTube to Music I Wrote (Resolved)



## Reid Rosefelt (Apr 15, 2018)

Some time ago, I put up a clip on YouTube for a short film I wrote and directed in 2003 called "Tiger: His Fall & Rise," starring my avatar and the late Adrienne Shelly (who went on to direct "Waitress") The film is pretty bad and the "music" I wrote for it is nothing I'm very proud of. This particular clip is largely driven by an Acid loop (which I purchased). But for better or worse, I did write it, people saw the film at festivals, and I copyrighted the film. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0420252/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

Today I found out that the Music Licensing Company Muserk has claimed that they own the rights to the music I wrote for the clip, and YouTube notified me that I have the right to dispute this. If they deem it to be a false dispute, they will toss me off YouTube. 

The slogan of Muserk is "claim your rights." 

This has actually happened once before with a few clips from this same film. In that instance, it was a fairly well-known film company that wanted to claim the movie scenes themselves, not just the music. In that case, I was able to resolve things with YouTube, but I never got an explanation from the company that wanted to take my stuff. 

My guess is that many companies just claim ownership willy-nilly of thousands of things on YouTube, and monetize them until somebody complains. To be generous, perhaps they have some kind of computer algorithm doing this for them. Or maybe YouTube even does it. But that's a pretty wide net. Maybe that's okay for a first sort, but at some point, a human being needs to look carefully and determine if infringement did occur before planting their flag. They shouldn't just have YouTube contact a content producer like myself and accuse me of infringement of my own intellectual property. Otherwise, it is fraud as far as I'm concerned. 

Has anybody else had experience with something like this?


----------



## mouse (Apr 15, 2018)

Most likely what happened is that someone added a track to the youtube content ID system and it also uses the same acid loop. If your acid loop is exposed in the mix, then that's what's bringing up the flag. That's why always ensuring a loop isn't solo'd in your mix is a good idea (and many EULA's will state that too).


----------



## angeruroth (Apr 15, 2018)

That happend to me but it wasn't Muserk. The first time it was "only" for a couple of months, but the others were never solved, so I have removed all muy videos from youtube.
I understand protección and rights, but when that happens they are stealing yours. And then you find you can't do anything.
I think that is their business model... A sad one if you ask me.

Said that, sometimes I believe it can be a simple mistake.
Try to contact them to be sure.


----------



## Daryl (Apr 15, 2018)

Learn a lesson; write your own music and stop using stock loops. Harsh, but it's the only way to beat this sort of thing. Same goes for synth patches. Never use unaltered presets. Move on, and consider it a lesson learned.


----------



## packetslave (Apr 15, 2018)

What are the usage rights on the Acid loop you used? Assuming it permits commercial use, then dispute the hell out of that claim. The only way to stop these bogus claims is to push back on them. Hard.


----------



## Reid Rosefelt (Apr 15, 2018)

Daryl said:


> Learn a lesson; write your own music and stop using stock loops. Harsh, but it's the only way to beat this sort of thing. Same goes for synth patches. Never use unaltered presets. Move on, and consider it a lesson learned.



My loop was never soloed. It was combined with other music. Anyway, that was 15 years ago, and I don't make music like that anymore.

As far as synth presets go, what about the film company that took whole movie clips before? 

I wrote a film, I cast it and rehearsed it. The sets were built under my direction, the costumes were made. I directed the cast, worked with the cinematographer and editor. I wrote several songs, which were recorded by pros in a studio. That's just a fraction of what I did and it's a lot more complex than altering a synth preset. And this company had no compunction about claiming ownership.

At best, companies like this have a very casual attitude to the idea of claiming the rights to material just because they see it online. At worse, they are consciously engaging in fraud. 

I don't care about my movie, but I was curious to see if this is a common practice. That's why I posted.


----------



## vintagevibe (Apr 15, 2018)

Daryl said:


> Learn a lesson; write your own music and stop using stock loops. Harsh, but it's the only way to beat this sort of thing. Same goes for synth patches. Never use unaltered presets. Move on, and consider it a lesson learned.



I’m not sure that’s true for synth patches. Am I missing something?


----------



## angeruroth (Apr 15, 2018)

I don't think the loop caused his issue.
I don't use loops and someyhing very similar happend to me more than once...


----------



## JEPA (Apr 15, 2018)

interesting issue. that's one of the questions why i've posted this thread also:
https://vi-control.net/community/threads/are-v-i-libraries-royalty-free-by-default.70718/


----------



## Desire Inspires (Apr 15, 2018)

Daryl said:


> Learn a lesson; write your own music and stop using stock loops. Harsh, but it's the only way to beat this sort of thing. Same goes for synth patches. Never use unaltered presets. Move on, and consider it a lesson learned.



Rubbish.

Use whatever you want and fight for your rights. You made the music, so it is yours and yours alone. The loop and synth manufacturers do not become songwriters for something _*YOU*_ created. And neither does some corporation using robots to file false copyright claims. Fight!

That is how you win in life. That is the lesson to be learned. Fight, and never relent.


----------



## Replicant (Apr 15, 2018)

Desire Inspires said:


> Rubbish.
> 
> Use whatever you want and fight for your rights. You made the music, so it is yours and yours alone. The loop and synth manufacturers do not become songwriters for something _*YOU*_ created. And neither does some corporation using robots to file false copyright claims. Fight!
> 
> That is how you win in life. That is the lesson to be learned. Fight, and never relent.



From a moral perspective, you are right. If the EULA states that you can use it for commercial productions, then you are completely within your rights to use it.

From a pragmatic perspective, _he_ is right. The only way to be sure to avoid this issue, is to forgo using a loop.


----------



## Desire Inspires (Apr 15, 2018)

Replicant said:


> From a moral perspective, you are right. If the EULA states that you can use it for commercial productions, then you are completely within your rights to use it.
> 
> From a pragmatic perspective, _he_ is right. The only way to be sure to avoid this issue, is to forgo using a loop.



Okay. You guys win. No more loops.


----------



## gsilbers (Apr 15, 2018)

yes also happened to me. some random user claimed ownership and i just coudlnt fight it. i had to remove the video. 
youtube had a thing to dispute with those same people who flasley claim ownership. i pressed it but never got an answer. try contacting youtube but no avail.
makes no sense. youtube just wants to be a faceless player and places their own rules that poeple think "copyright claim" means copyright law in real life. and if someone uploads someone elses property and no one claims it then its not bad. this share it culture just killing the entertainment biz.


----------



## JEPA (Apr 15, 2018)

i found this:

https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2797370?hl=en



*Common questions about Content ID*

What options are available to copyright owners?
Copyright owners can choose different actions to take on material that matches theirs:


*Block* a whole video from being viewed
*Monetize* the video by running ads against it; in some cases sharing revenue with the uploader
*Track* the video’s viewership statistics
Any of these actions can be country-specific. A video may be monetized in one country, and blocked or tracked in another.

Who can use Content ID?

YouTube only grants Content ID to copyright owners who meet specific criteria. To be approved, they must own exclusive rights to a substantial body of original material that is frequently uploaded by the YouTube user community.

YouTube also sets explicit guidelines on how to use Content ID. We monitor Content ID use and disputes on an ongoing basis to ensure these guidelines are followed.

Content owners who repeatedly make erroneous claims can have their Content ID access disabled and their partnership with YouTube terminated.

If you are a content owner and believe your content meets the criteria, you can https://www.youtube.com/content_id_signup (apply for Content ID).

Related topics
What is a Content ID claim?

Who claimed my video?

Dispute a Content ID claim

How does Content ID work on live streams and Hangouts on Air?


----------



## Daryl (Apr 16, 2018)

Desire Inspires said:


> Rubbish.
> 
> Use whatever you want and fight for your rights. You made the music, so it is yours and yours alone. The loop and synth manufacturers do not become songwriters for something _*YOU*_ created. And neither does some corporation using robots to file false copyright claims. Fight!
> 
> That is how you win in life. That is the lesson to be learned. Fight, and never relent.


That's your opinion. However, if the track is "driven" by a loop written by someone else, I would question how much of the track is actually yours in the first place. If you write the loop yourself, you created it, and there would have been no claim in the first place. I'm not saying that the claim is legitimate. I'm saying that as the music is not 100% original, it may not be worth fighting the claim.


----------



## Daryl (Apr 16, 2018)

Desire Inspires said:


> Okay. You guys win. No more loops.


No more loops created by other people, is more accurate.


----------



## givemenoughrope (Apr 16, 2018)

So what about people who use the Amen break or Funky Drummer or The Levee Breaks intro? (Meaning as far as the youtube ID)


----------



## Daryl (Apr 16, 2018)

givemenoughrope said:


> So what about people who use the Amen break or Funky Drummer or The Levee Breaks intro? (Meaning as far as the youtube ID)


They lose, if the recording is a "known" recording...!


----------



## Kony (Apr 16, 2018)

The way this works for youtube is by actually rewarding copyright claims by larger companies against legitimate smaller copyright owners, or so it would seem according to this


----------



## JEPA (Apr 16, 2018)

found this in the DJ comments pool, interesting but i don't know if all is true:


----------



## Reid Rosefelt (Apr 16, 2018)

Thank you @JEPA and @Kony. I now understand what happened to me. 

I would guess that it's okay to use loops as long as your work is policed on YouTube by a company like Muserk. That way your music is safe and you might also get to monetize the work of other musicians. 

I do think that this info should be more widely disseminated. While individuals may have little power, companies like Loopmasters, Splice, Big Fish, Zero-G, Native Instruments (sounds.com), Noiiz, etc., might not want their customers to know this. They should work with YouTube to protect all their customers from spurious claims.


----------



## gsilbers (Apr 16, 2018)

Kony said:


> The way this works for youtube is by actually rewarding copyright claims by larger companies against legitimate smaller copyright owners, or so it would seem according to this




freakin bs stuff. how can this be? not only its his stuff but there is no music. andits a video of his iPhone so its not like a famous thing and warner chappel is claiming it. i think they just go by hello on the title. 


would the solution be to just create a new account. upload from the old one and with the new account just claim copyright of that video. that way no one else can double claim it?


how stupid and illigal this stuff is.


----------



## gsilbers (Apr 16, 2018)

and just to add some more braod info about youtube.

Please be aware that "youtube copyright claim" and real copyright are not the same.

ive seen poeple comment in this and other forums about uplaoding examples of film scoring demos using famous footage, or even educational and fair use. its still not legal. even if youtube strikes it down or not.

I worked helping out the legal/licensing folks at fox and any footage needs to get licensed. even for educational purposes. the rate is about $10,000 a minute for commercial releases and for educational is about $800-2000. and fair use is not as easy as poeple thing it is.
but studios have lost that uphill battle and im guessing they dont want to redo that napter things of suing folks. but im not aware of their political policies about this stuff in a broader sense or the legalities they have to fight. I know many tv shows and movies have some sort of tech that helps deal with the youtube thing.

the worse part is that its in youtube policies
"items that may not be exclusive to individuals include:


mashups, “best of”s, compilations, and remixes of other works
video gameplay, software visuals, trailers
unlicensed music and video
music or video that was licensed, but without exclusivity
recordings of performances (including concerts, events, speeches, shows)

so, unlicensed video is what im talking about that one , even youtube cares if its stolen or shared. while great for everyone to be able to see "how to videos" or other famous footage videos, its slowly siking he enterteinament ship.


----------



## lpuser (Apr 16, 2018)

Why not just dispute the claim? I have had this as well and it was fairly easy to dispute and get my rights back. While ContentID might have its issues, I think it´s better to have "something" in place to protect music than nothing at all. But these are just my 2 cents


----------



## gsilbers (Apr 16, 2018)

lpuser said:


> Why not just dispute the claim? I have had this as well and it was fairly easy to dispute and get my rights back. While ContentID might have its issues, I think it´s better to have "something" in place to protect music than nothing at all. But these are just my 2 cents



i did try and didnt work. as daniel mentioned in his video that if you dispute and loose then you get a strike and might loose the video. and itsnot loosing as a judge or someone says so. youtube just has an algorighm that says "one video is up,another person claims it, other person disputes, if another person counters dipsute he wins and orignal uplloader geta strike". no real human involved. but real money and work is involved.


----------



## lpuser (Apr 16, 2018)

gsilbers said:


> i did try and didnt work.



Wow, that´s weird, usually this is not a big deal. Hmm, personally I would try it again.


----------



## Kony (Apr 16, 2018)

If you get three strikes, you lose your channel so that would scare a lot of people off


----------



## givemenoughrope (Apr 16, 2018)

Daryl said:


> They lose, if the recording is a "known" recording...!



I meant is it possible for the samplers to get a claim in first before the samplees.

Not sure how their system of identification works. It must go by the recording and not melodies or synth presets (unless they are really elaborate synth sounds akin to a loop) like someone above said, right?


----------



## Daryl (Apr 16, 2018)

givemenoughrope said:


> I meant is it possible for the samplers to get a claim in first before the samplees.
> 
> Not sure how their system of identification works. It must go by the recording and not melodies or synth presets (unless they are really elaborate synth sounds akin to a loop) like someone above said, right?


Yes, it's all about the "fingerprint" of the recording. However, it will recognise loops and evolving synth presets as being the same, if they are the same, hence the issue with stock loops.


----------



## Reid Rosefelt (Apr 17, 2018)

For the record, I received an email today from YouTube saying that Muserk had released their copyright claim on my music. 

In addition to filing a claim with Youtube, I also wrote to Muserk directly.


----------



## Desire Inspires (Apr 17, 2018)

TigerTheFrog said:


> For the record, I received an email today from YouTube saying that Muserk had released their copyright claim on my music.
> 
> In addition to filing a claim with Youtube, I also wrote to Muserk directly.


Awesome. All is good!


----------



## Reid Rosefelt (Apr 17, 2018)

Desire Inspires said:


> Awesome. All is good!


Thanks to this forum and Audiobus forum, I better understand what happened to me and know what I will do in the future. I do think that the world at large needs to know more about this. 

One funny thing that did happen on the other forum is that one guy was accused by YouTube of infringing himself. They said that his music was identical to the same music he wrote, for which a company was policing the web on his behalf.


----------



## Kony (Apr 17, 2018)

TigerTheFrog said:


> One funny thing that did happen on the other forum is that one guy was accused by YouTube of infringing himself. They said that his music was identical to the same music he wrote, for which a company was policing the web on his behalf.


----------



## Michael Antrum (Apr 18, 2018)

TigerTheFrog said:


> One funny thing that did happen on the other forum is that one guy was accused by YouTube of infringing himself. They said that his music was identical to the same music he wrote, for which a company was policing the web on his behalf.



Who won the dispute ?


----------



## Reid Rosefelt (Apr 18, 2018)

mikeybabes said:


> Who won the dispute ?



Excellent question.  Checking.


----------



## Reid Rosefelt (Apr 20, 2018)

mikeybabes said:


> Who won the dispute ?



Here's what he (Red Sky Lullaby) said:

_I contacted my publisher who was sub-publishing to some other publisher (I think orchard music) and told them to remove the claim with YouTube for anything on my channel. I think I still sent the YouTube form through saying it was my own music on my own channel. It was pretty straightforward in my case as the copyright challenge was saying you are using a Red Sky Lullaby tune and that’s the YouTube channel name._


----------

