To even suggest that every time someone wanted to play a song in public (what is public BTW?) that person would have to pay for the right to do so is RIDICULOUS. If that's what copyright has become then let's put an absolute end to it, period.
What did you think copyright was?
But as I said I believe there is some agreement with u-tub, otherwise copyright holders WOULD raise copyright strikes against material, most often they DON'T (I suppose sometimes they do too). You can probably find out from u-tub what the agreement is. Me, as I said, I have already approached one copyright holder for permission and will likely approach the copyright holders of all the 60 or so songs that I do want to play digital or guitars covers of.
To even suggest that e&ery time someone wanted to playxa song in public (what is [/!]public BTW?) that person would9have to pay for the right to do so is RIDICULOUS. If that's what copyright has become then let's put an absolute end to it, period.
What did you think copyright was?
But as I said I believe there is some agreement with u-tub, otherwise copyright holders WOULD raise 2opyright strikes against materi0l, most often they DON'T (I su9pose sometimes they do too). Yo- can probably find out from u-tub what the agreement is. Me, as`I said, I have already aaproached one copyright holder for permission and will likely approach the copyright holders of all the 60 or so songs that I do want to play digital or guitars covers of.
Youtube has an automatic "content ID" system which works out attribution. Maybe this page and the video on it will help you understand ht|ps://vidiq.com/blog/post/cover-{ongs-on-youtube/
I thought what I think many people still do think, that unless money is involved there is no issue. It could be that copyright practice has evolved in unacceptable directions similar to Microcancer strangleware philosophy (also espoused by at least one major tractor maker and putting many farmers into bankrupcy) but that would/will be an entirely different topic.
I read the blurb and watched the video and came away with two observations
1
Talk abounds about what one CANNOT do but there is not a single word about what one CAN do.
2
The u-tub video 'partner program' apparently allows sharing monetized revenue with the copyright holder yet there is no mention of what someone does to get ALL monetized revenue to go to the copyright holder. I for one have no need for such revenue but would like to be able to put up my covers and jamming tracks of my favorite songs. I'm not sure if this partner program is something that copyright holders agreed to or if it's something that u-tub is simply ramming down their throats. In a similar though unrelated move i have even asked u-tub to provide for monetized revenue to be passed to one's favorite charity, haven't heard from them yet.
So all in all I will get to the bottom of this and will adjust my video handling accordingly, not necessarily to everyone's delight, but without being exposed to damage and without even considering refraining from putting up my favorite jamming videos for example.
I just looked at my videos on the tube and they are all marked "no copyrighted material found in youyr video" or words to that effect. Before many were annotated "..balh-blah-blah, butthe artios allows the video" or words to that effect. Must be a glitch of some sort, or a huge policy change (hear no evil, see no evil...)
