Are VideoHive authors allowed to use AudioJungle items free of watermarks?
Somewhere between 1 and 8 days.
prestashopthemes saidYes I also avoid them too, hmm, difficult..
KabbalisticVillage saidMaybe people do, but I tend to stay away from any shortened links because I want to see where I’m going before I click.
I only use the full URL on all of my Youtube videos..i have never had problem. Do you think people click shorter url’s in general though?
(I use bitly) Hmmm… I’ve never thought about that.. but yeah, me too. Matt?
Analytics is not working for me.
Great! Good luck. Let us know if we can be of any more help. Also, let the AJ forums know when your videos are live. We love to see how our music is used!
The renewing the license thing is just if you make new videos more than a year after you first bought the license. This is not about the video running/being online for more than a year.
Yes, if you are continuing the series after the first year, only one new license needs to be repurchased for the 2nd year (and another for the 3rd, if the same series is continuing on from there).
All info on licensing for a series here: http://audiojungle.net/licenses/faq#separate-license-a (check out the first two questions)
Check reviewer Stuck In The Basement’s response here for your answer: http://audiojungle.net/forums/thread/exclusive-author-we-can-use-our-music/146787?page=2
Thanks, Matt! Very helpful find.
I’d like this clarified for me:
It has been my understanding that if we are exclusive authors, any promotion we do for the licensing of our AudioJungle songs on our own accounts (most likely through video via YouTube, etc.) must contain the “Audio Jungle” watermark (basically the preview file we provide when submitting a song).
I have come across exclusive authors every once in a while that are not following this practice, so am I wrong?
And if I’m not wrong (and this is the rule – that you must promote with only the watermarked file), why is this the rule?
Because – we are able to sell listening versions of our songs through iTunes, etc. Aren’t we just providing the “listening version” with videos that are free of watermarks (people on YouTube who want to listen hate the watermarks)? And if people do choose to download and use these songs without a license, we can track that now with AdRev. So then why only allowed to use the watermark version anymore? I can see why when this wasn’t the case, but with listening versions + AdRev, I don’t see much of a need anymore (unless you are choosing to forego services like AdRev, of course).
(Again, I have come across other authors without watermarked songs on their online video accounts before, but I am posing this question after noticing an AJ Staff Member (also an exclusive author) having one of their songs up without the watermark on it. So I’m realizing my understanding of what the rules are about watermarks could be wrong)