Thanks Alumo, those figures definitely illustrate the problem here. I can understand peoples’ concerns with ContentID, particularly YouTube users who have channels that review games / videos / music etc as their videos get flagged automatically despite them legitimately using 15s clips of media under the fair use act. That certainly needs to be sorted out, however, this is the first encarnation of ContentID that will no doubt improve. We’re at a point where we can finally receive reports like on TuneSat for our music for free and earn from it, albeit only on YouTube at this point.
Don’t for one second think that all the famous artists don’t have their music registered with ContentID – do you think Beyoncé is fine with the mass downloading of her music from all those albums uploaded onto YouTube? Admittedly, it’s different for RF music because we’re selling a license meaning there is a legitimate use. But what AdRev is doing is asking legitimate users to show it. I don’t see the problem with that if the process is as easy as filling in a short form, it’s like someone asking to see your cinema ticket before going to see a film or registering software before use.
Gari – while it’s true some libraries don’t let you submit your music if you have it in ContentID, I think you’ll see a lot of libraries change their mind as everybody starts to use the sort of technology to monitor and protect their tracks. And if you are exclusive, it doesn’t mean you can’t submit to other libraries that don’t allow ContentID, you just have to make sure it’s not the same music (which it wouldn’t be anyway if you’re exclusive).
I’m seriously considering about jumping in on the AdRev bandwagon. This seems to me lika a viable option to have my tracks copyright protected against copyright trolls (which I am victim of for one of my tracks from here). Does anyone maybe know how can I reclaim my copyright after someone illegally claimed it on ContentID?
Dejans, as much as there is antagonism against systems like AdRev (even from composers who complain of their music being used illegally!), I think they are our best option currently to protect our music on YouTube at least.
Even if it is only on YouTube at this point in time, I think it’s a step in the right direction in educating people that not everything on the Internet is intended to be free. I believe it will become standard practice for all libraries and composers to have their tracks in a database (including all PRO registered tracks) that is checked against for illegal use in future. AdRev is the first of these companies and taking a lot of the brunt of criticism as a result.
Anyway, to answer your question, I would contact AdRev directly and say you’re interested in getting involved, but someone else has illegally registered your track(s) in ContentID. They should be able to sort it out and transfer the rights to you.
Well done Gareth, good to see you got the job.
I thought I’d share an interesting email from another library I’m involved with that has introduced a new technology called LicenseID that digitally fingerprints all their music (I’ve removed the library name). It says:
What does this mean for our Artists? Whenever your music is licensed from our library, LicenseID automatically embeds an inaudible tag onto the track that contains your license information which helps us more easily identify the correct use of your copyrights.
What does that mean for our Clients? LID also benefits the licensees by immediately giving them information that enables them to prove license compliance.
In a nutshell:
- Whenever your music is licensed from us, it has a LID on it.
- LID allows clients to prove they have a license and makes it easier to identify when there is a copyright violation.
- This service and copyright protection is only available through our library.
The search changes have rebalanced what gets exposed, and when new items move up for popular search terms, other items have to move down. Not everything can be in 1st place forever. I can understand that this sucks if you’ve been getting consistent good sales for a while off an existing body of work, and suddenly it changes. Unfortunately, the scales were tipped too far favouring a smaller group of authors for too long, and it hurts a bit when we need to rebalance it.
I’m trying to get my head around the best strategy for authors now in terms of keeping sales consistent. Over at AJ we’ve always been told that success on the marketplaces is about treating it as a ‘marathon’ rather than a ‘sprint’ and therefore investing a lot of time in the quality of items over churning them out regularly.
If items have a shelf-life / honeymoon period during which they have exposure and a chance to sell, yet don’t sell for one reason or another (not appearing in search results is a pretty important one), then it sounds like the model has now moved to one where regular uploading AND deleting of older tracks is the only way to keep sales consistent.
I know you can’t give away inside secrets on how to be successful here as it could lead to abuse of the system, but trying to survive off sales here is becoming increasingly difficult since the end of last year, so some basic advice on how to stay afloat would be greatly appreciated by a lot of us I think. Maybe a new sticky thread with that advice, like this one but for good practice within Envato?http://audiojungle.net/forums/thread/ways-to-promote-your-audiojungle-music/55643
We’re in the dark as to how to tag and describe our items at the moment which means I might as well put in ‘uplifting banana’ to appear under ‘corporate motivational’ results which, I would have thought, would ‘pollute’ the search system in the long-run.
Appreciate all the communication you’ve provided so far, it’s good to have a voice from Envato providing updates on this.
Looks like the laws in the U.S. are changing. More interesting info… http://www.ascap.com/press/2014/0225-ascap-statement-on-sea.aspx
Thanks for this – I’ve looked a bit into what The Songwriter Equity Act is, but I’m still unclear on what it actually means in practice. In that article, it says this act will ‘remove one of the artificial barriers that is keeping songwriter compensation below fair market rates and creating a dramatic disparity between the compensation of music copyright holders’.
Is this act intending to increase the amount of royalties a composer would receive then? I can see in another article that songwriters and composers ‘currently receive 12 times less than the compensation record labels and artists receive for a performance / “stream,” of the same song’, but I’m not clear on what it actually means for us as royalty-free composers.
If anyone could clarify, I’d be most appreciative.
...I am always eager to finish ASAP and move on….maybe I should take my time!
I’m the same, but trying to focus more on the usability and mix of my tracks lately as it can be frustrating churning out tracks and then having to file them away elsewhere when they don’t get traction here. I think the old adage of quality of quantity (in terms of how useful a track is) is the key. If it’s not usable as production music, it’s not got a place on AJ I find.
Always been a fan of your work, congrats Martijn, well done on such an impressive achievement.