How To Deal With Copyright On YouTube: CONTENT ID Explained #WTFU

How To Deal With Copyright On YouTube: CONTENT ID Explained #WTFU

Contrary to any misinformation you may have
heard, YouTube didn’t change any copyright
policies last week… but they did make a
slight adjustment to their Content-ID system.
I want to explain how the system works, why
it *doesn’t* suck, how to deal with it, why
it doesn’t just affect gamers, and most importantly:
what single quick fix could correct the entire
system instantly.
Hi, I’m Jonathan Paula. I apologize in advance,
but this video will be a long, and exhaustive
discussion on Content ID. Those in a rush
can find a full script for this video in the
description, and I’m including the topic-timeline
above, which will hot-link you directly to
the different topics I’ll be covering in case
you’d like to skip ahead. If you only have
a minute, I suggest you watch the “Conclusion”
section, where I discuss the BIGGEST thing
I want you to take away from this video. And
it goes with without saying: if you find this
video informative or helpful in any way – please
click the LIKE button, FAVORITE this video,
and SHARE it around. It is crucial more people
under these issues, so let’s begin.
This is a complicated issue with many nuances,
but I am in an extremely unique position,
as a content-creator who utilizes fair-use
material often, as an owner of a multi-channel
network, and as someone who has personally
won over 500 separate copyright claims. I’ve
been an independent YouTube Partner since
the program first issued invites in January
2008 – In those seven years, I have been very
fortunate and appreciative to earn my full-time
income from this site. But the recent changes
to YouTube’s Content-ID system are jeopardizing
my livelihood, as well as countless others
on the site.
The Content-ID system, which was born out
of necessity to handle and resolve lawsuits
from companies like Viacom, utilizes sophisticated
scanning technology to automatically match
potentially infringing videos against a visual
or audio reference file that exists in its
database. Hollywood movie studios, record
companies, game developers and even some top-tier
YouTube partners like myself have access to
YouTube’s “Content Manager System”, or CMS.
These CMS accounts are the people who have
the ability to input assets, or “reference
files” *into* the Content-ID database (which
is actually just YouTube itself). When I upload
a new episode of “Is It A Good Idea To Microwave
This?”, or when Universal Music releases Taylor
Swift’s new single… we have the option to
apply what’s known as a “match policy” for
“automatic claims”. Each asset owner can actually
adjust the percentage of audio or video that
needs to be featured to trigger a Content-ID
match. They can also route these matches to
a human agent for review, to reduce any false-positives.
For game developers, the tools are already
in place to detect an audio-only policy on
their assets, which would easily exclude the
vast number of lets players on YouTube, who
provide their own commentary – just like it
would be very easy for movie studios to do
the same allowing film reviewers to continue
their work unimpeded. Game developers CapCom,
Blizzard, and Ubisoft were quick to apologize
to many YouTubers who were “falsely-tagged”
by their match policies last week, but honestly:
it was their own fault. If they had paid attention
to what policies they had enabled on their
content, nothing would have been matched at
all. Setup your policies appropriately! Scan
only for audio, and route matches for manual
review before any further action is taken.
Ignorance is not an excuse: pay attention,
instead of causing a lot of undue stress.
When used correctly, Content ID is a powerful
tool that can be very beneficial. By and large,
it’s actually a great system that protects
millions of songs, movies, games, TV shows,
and other work – keeping the revenue and ownership
in the hands of its rightful owners. I love
that I have a team of robots protecting my
huge library of 2,500 videos from anyone who
attempts to steal my work and profit from
it – in fact, Jogwheel’s videos are routinely
stolen and re-uploaded about 15 times a week.
When potentially infringing material is uploaded,
and Content-ID makes a match, CMS-owners have
three options how to deal with the video:
“Track”, “Block”, or “Monetize”. Some companies
may have no issue with you utilizing their
game footage, or background music – and only
want to track your content, to see how successful
it is. A musician, like my friend Rob Scallon
may encourage his audience to download his
music, and sample it in their videos – The
“Track” option would provide him with useful
analytics on how many individuals took him
up on that offer, without penalizing them
for it. Whereas FOX Broadcasting may see an
entire episode of Family Guy as a particularly
egregious upload, and they’ll block the video
– making it unwatchable to everyone on YouTube.
But by far, the most common policy is to “monetize”
the content. The infringing material remains
on YouTube, publicly viewable to the world,
but instead of the uploader earning revenue
on the video, the earnings are given to the
CMS-account that applied the ownership policy
in the first place. Now, you’ll notice I didn’t
say the “proper right’s holder”. And this
is inherently Content’s ID most public flaw,
but not its worst: any CMS account can upload
content, and apply a match policy as their
own. And this process is unfortunately far
easier than you’d think. As a result, some
companies – either by malicious intent, or
more likely by an innocent accident, have
applied polices to assets they don’t actually
have legal ownership of. Many less informed
YouTubers have complained when they get an
erroneous match from some random company — claiming
they’re being scammed out of income. In
all likelihood, there was an overlap between
policies, or some intern at Blizzard Entertainment
clicked the wrong checkbox. But, if these
false-claims *were* intentional? Well, YouTube
really needs to crack down on them. With a
site as big as this, with over 10 years of
content uploaded every day… a few stray,
incorrect matches are not really a big deal.
To extend the example from earlier, Taylor
Swift is not personally clicking the “flag”
button to remove cover-versions of her songs
off the site. Instead YouTube’s Content-ID
robots, under Universal Music Group’s instruction
are automatically detecting these uploads.
Those inside a multi-channel network (MCN
for short), and CMS-partners themselves, were
previously excluded from a majority of Content-ID
scans. It was generally assumed, that if you
were partnered with Machinima, or part of
Sony Pictures Entertainment, you weren’t going
to upload any infringing content – part of
an unconfirmed “Trust algorithm” YouTube placed
on its larger partners. Again, let me repeat
that: partners inside an MCN were protected
NOT because their network secured permission
from gaming companies, but because they were
excluded from Content-ID scans. So many people,
include dozens of top-level gamers on this
site are under the misinformed impression
that networks provided them a service. They
didn’t. They typed their channel into a box,
and by proxy of their “trust level”, their
partners were seemingly protected. Somewhere
down the line however, YouTube introduced
three separate tiers of partnership within
a network: “Managed”, “Affiliated”, and “Whitelisted”
– if you’re signed to an MCN, and not on YouTube’s
top-500 most subscribed list, you’re likely
an “Affiliate” partner, and until recently,
that meant you were given the same amount
of “trust” as whomever you were networked
with. As a result, you would have been protected
by automatic Content-ID claims… you could
still of course be hit with the occasional
manual match – so while you may have been
able to get away with posting copyrighted
material for a time, it didn’t mean you were
safe, and it definitely didn’t mean you were
without legal fault.
This all changed last week. YouTube released
a statement on December 11th explaining, “We
recently enabled Content ID scanning on channels
identified as affiliates of MCNs. This has
resulted in new copyright claims for some
users, based on policies set by the relevant
content owners. As ever, channel owners can
easily dispute Content ID claims if they believe
those claims are invalid.” Meaning, if you’re
in a network, you’re no longer protected.
If you’re an independent YouTuber without
a CMS-level account… literally nothing has
changed for you, except now everyone else
is complaining about the same issues you’ve
been dealing with since day one.
When the system matches a video to one or
more policies issued by CMS-accounts, the
uploader will receive an e-mail, explaining
what type of policy has been applied. In this
particular case, Warner Bros. applied a “Monetize”
policy on this episode of Movie Night. So,
while you can still watch that video, I am
no longer earning revenue from it. Obviously,
this is better than having the video outright
blocked. Occasionally though, the system makes
mistakes – like the aforementioned erroneous
matches from random companies, or by detecting
content that isn’t actually infringing. Maybe
you secured permission first, or your usage
qualifies as fair use, or the person issuing
the claim doesn’t own the rights to the content
either. These are valid, legitimate, and most
importantly LEGAL defenses if your content
is incorrectly matched. Luckily, YouTube has
tools in place to dispute matches you believe
to be false. By clicking the link provided
in that e-mail, or by visiting the “Copyright
Notices” section of your channel’s video manager,
you will see a link below the matched video
that reads “matched third party content”.
Clicking this link provides you with an explanation
of the match, a time-code link to the exact
portion of the video containing the allegedly
infringing material, and the name of the claimant
who issued the match. You now have two options
available, “Acknowledge”, or “Dispute”. If
you believe the claim to be genuine, as in…
you knowingly uploaded copyrighted material
without permission, you’d select “Acknowledge”,
which doesn’t adversely affect your account
any worse than the match itself… it simply
solidifies the ruling, preventing you from
disputing it again later. But, if you disagree
with the match, either on fair use grounds,
or if you have permission to use the content,
you can file a dispute.
Now, I’m not a lawyer, so I won’t provide
legal advice regarding fair use — but generally,
news reporting, criticism, reviews, commentary,
parodies, or some transformative use… are
instances *I* would classify as fair use.
As for all you gamers and let’s players out
there, of which I count myself as one… the
argument for fair use is trickier, especially
since there is zero legal precedent to argue
either way. In America, our fair use copyright
law was written in 1976 – so while it covers
film criticism, song parodies, and news reporting…
telling jokes while you play Call Of Duty
may not qualify.
Inherently, the unique value of lets play
videos are the personalities, not necessarily
the gameplay footage: but until an actual
judge rules one way or another: tread carefully
in this space, and attempt to secure permission
from the game developers whenever possible.
Almost ALL of the frustration and outrage
last week came from gamers. But why are they
so upset? Lets play exist within a grey area
of the law, and the fact that your videos
weren’t being tagged before was absolutely
no indication it’d stay that way forever.
So while I take issue with people being upset
and surprised by these changes, it doesn’t
seem like good news for the gaming community.
Almost all uploads going forward will be immediately
Content-ID scanned, and as we discussed, your
options for disputing are not as legally viable
as other types of fair-use content. But really,
what it comes down to is that if you’re not
confident you can win a dispute, you shouldn’t
be uploading to begin with… unless you’re
comfortable with not earning revenue. Practically
speaking though, last week’s change will scare
many people off, and the community will suffer
as a result. But for those who do have a legal
right to their content, and are willing to
defend their work, hopefully they can stick
around and continue producing awesome stuff.
Assuming you do have permission, or fair use
to your content, and you want to dispute,
all you have to do is agree to the terms of
your decision, and briefly explain your reasoning.
For Movie Night – I simply quote the Copyright
Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright
Act 1976, which very specifically allows criticism
and commentary for film and television. Once
you’ve filled a dispute – the CMS-accounts
attached to that policy will be notified,
and they each have 30 days to respond. For
blocked videos, just initiating the dispute
process will restore your video, but only
on a temporary basis while the CMS-account
makes a decision. After you file a dispute,
the link next to your video from the video
manager page *should* reflect that the claim
has been “disputed”, but in what can only
be a technical glitch, a number of these links
– by my estimate, at least half, won’t update…
so ignore this text, as it is notoriously
This is what the process looks like on the
other side, as the policy-enforcer has the
option to “Release”, “Confirm”, or “Takedown”.
There is no third-party arbitrator involved,
no copyright lawyers, no YouTube, just you
and the company you allegedly stole from.
If they agree with your reason for disputing,
they are bound by the honor code – and nothing
else – to release the claim. Now, this next
part is purely educated speculation on my
part, but it would seem a number of companies
have automated this review process – far too
often disputes are rejected, or even released
far quicker than a human agent could possibly
review them, especially given the volume they
must deal with – and often with a remarkable
level of inconsistency from one ruling to
the next. Technically, this is completely
illegal – but unfortunately, YouTube hasn’t
found a solution to this. Thankfully, it doesn’t
seem to be resulting in to many issues as
of yet. If a company does release the claim,
your video is restored to its former status,
blocked videos become public, and monetized
videos can be re-claimed on your end. If you
file a legitimate dispute, or if the claim
itself was false… you’ll likely be successful
in having your content released nine times
out of ten, even if it takes the full 30 days.
But what about that 10% that get “reinstated”,
well, let’s talk about the next process, APPEALS.
If your dispute is rejected, either because
the claimant disagreed with your reasoning,
or because you simply didn’t have a right
to the content to begin with, you’ll get another
e-mail with info about what happened. Like
before, you have the option to acknowledge
this ruling, and live with whatever policy
has been applied. If you are adamant that
the claim should be released, you can risk
a potential copyright strike on your account
(one of only three you’d be allowed before
your entire channel is suspended), and appeal.
The form is a bit more serious, and besides
providing the claimant with your contact information,
you’ll also have to include an in-depth explanation
of your usage. Based on my experience, all
appeals are in fact reviewed by an actual
human agent, which is perhaps why you actually
have a better chance at success than with
the lower-level disputes. While this process
can be scary, if you are confident in your
rights usage, don’t be afraid to defend your
content, and appeal any reinstated disputes.
If you win the appeal, the claim will finally
be released, and your video will be restored
to your ownership. But if the appeal is rejected,
and you’re hit with a copyright strike? Well,
you still have some options if you wish to
continue the process.
When your account receives a copyright, or
community-guidelines strike, your channel
is no longer “in good standing” – the infringing
video is completely removed from YouTube,
and some of your channel features like external
annotations, unlisted uploads, live streams,
and even the ability to appeal future disputes
are removed. Fortunately, these strikes automatically
dissolve after six months. But if you can’t
wait that long, you can file a counter-notification
– which involves more scary-looking text boxes,
and sharing your full contact info again.
Admittedly, I have much less experience in
this area, but the result is the same if the
eventual ruling is in your favor: your video
is restored to its original status, and all
copyright strikes are removed from your account.
Bottom line is: if you truly have a legal
right to use copyrighted material in your
upload, and you’re willing to fight back and
defend yourself – it may take 75-days, but
you can come out on top. The dispute process
is nothing to be afraid of.
Well, there you have it – that’s the full,
long, and often confusing process of how YouTube’s
Content-ID system detects videos, and how
and why you should fight back. It definitely
has its issues however, and the absolute biggest
is that it penalizes users who LEGALLY incorporate
copyrighted material into their content. Whether
you’re a Let’s player featuring an indie game
title with explicit permission from the developer,
or reviewing the Anchorman movie while showing
brief clips from the trailer: the Content-ID
system is indiscriminate in issuing claims
based on whatever policies various CMS-accounts
plug into the system. Of course, how could
a series of complex scanning algorithms know
how to differentiate between what’s cleared,
and what isn’t? It absolutely can’t, nor should
we expect it to. All the gamers complaining
this past week that their popular lets play
series was match-claimed need to recognize
this, and avoid disseminating misinformation
in emotional rants. It’s these reasons why
the dispute option exists at all, and since
there is absolutely ZERO risk to filing one
out, there ideally, shouldn’t be any problem
outside of a small inconvenience.
And while all content -that you legally have
a right to be using- can be recovered through
the system, as I explained above… the system
assumes the uploader is “guilty until proven
innocent.” During the dispute, appeal, and
counter-notification arbitration process (which
can last up to 75 days), any revenue earned
from the allegedly infringing video is being
awarded to the claimant, NOT the uploader.
In what would be quickly fixed by a YouTube
engineer, this is direct punishment to anyone
who works with any material potentially inside
the Content-ID database. When all the disputes
and appeals are finished, my videos will all
be returned to me, any strikes removed, and
channel features restored: but while I was
waiting 30 days for MGM to decide if my review
of “Skyfall” qualified as fair use? I didn’t
earn any money on that video I spent all week
working on. And for someone like me, who earns
mostly all of his income via Google AdSense,
losing revenue on one video that I have a
LEGAL RIGHT to monetize, even for one day
is totally inexcusable. But imagine it’s not
just one video… but 250, like the number
of claims I received this week. And it’s not
just for one day, it’s for an entire month.
And it’s not just one channel… it’s every
gamer, film-reviewer, news-reporter, and musician
on YouTube – potential untold millions of
dollars lining the pockets of those who don’t
legally deserve it. And in a completely separate
problem, which is probably just a technical
bug, YouTube actually prohibits users from
re-monetizing a video after a *successful*
dispute. Which means no one is earning revenue
from the video, including YouTube. This bug
isn’t as prevalent of an issue as lost revenue
during the dispute process, as it seems to
affect only a small percentage of released
claims… but it’s a frustratingly fixable
problem too.
YouTube’s suggestion is simply to avoid copyrighted
material… but that’s not a very realistic
suggestion, is it? My film reviews would be
reduced to boring videos without any music,
clips, or graphics… news and pop culture
vloggers wouldn’t be allowed to include any
images, and what of the massive gaming community?
YouTube’s #2 most subscribed user would have
nothing. Inherently, the Content-ID system
works well… but when you strip revenue away
from people who play by the rules, follow
the law, and go through your dispute system?
You’re driving away creative people that make
YouTube and its wonderful community possible.
hold revenue in escrow until the issue is
resolved, then award it to the victorious
party! It’s really that simple.
Well, okay – obviously the issue wasn’t completely
simple, I mean, it take did take me 15-minutes
to explain it all, but hopefully you understand
the nuances and intricacies of Content-ID
much better, and can appreciate the frustration
myself, and many other YouTubers have been
going through. Please share this video with
anyone and everyone you believe may benefit
from it, I am optimistic the issues I discussed
can be addressed if enough people truly understand
how it all works. And don’t forget to comment,
like, and subscribe, I will be reading and
responding to any all questions you have in
the comment-section below as always. Thank
you very much for watching and listening,
especially if you sat through the entire thing.
My name is Jonathan Paula, stepping down from
my soap box for now, and I hope to see you
right back here in the very near future.

100 thoughts on “How To Deal With Copyright On YouTube: CONTENT ID Explained #WTFU

  • July 31, 2014 at 11:57 am

    I have these message on 1 video in private mode. (uploaded on 31-07-2014)
    ''Matched third-party content.''
    ''Your video may include clips that are owned by a third party.
    To watch the matched clips please play the video on the right. The video will play from the point where the matched content was identified.
    Your video is available and playable.
    Copyright details:
    Visual content administered by: 0:50 MC for Warner Bros.''
    I have some questions…
    1. if I have a ''this Matched third-party content.'', after I acknowledge it, wld I be able to monetize this vid or other vids it in future?
    2. If I edit the image by using mirroring effect, will it bypass the content-id match?
    3. I am 100% sure the video is a parody/spoof; shld I dispute it? (I only used 20 seconds of a Warner Bros movie)
    4. About 'Fair Use' can non-Americans use this reasoning to file a dispute?

  • August 1, 2014 at 12:18 pm

    So if i made a video that have song or music in it and i the had permission from the owner of the song/music so i dont get a copyright id claim or what?

  • August 8, 2014 at 3:28 am

    The title should be Youtube's content ID and you. Lol

  • August 16, 2014 at 3:31 pm

    As a person who thinks to start a new channel which will have video game music covers from my childhood, reviews and game fan arts, i'm really confused by these problems. It's been 8 months since this video was uploaded. Did anything changed since then? Should i just say " this" and  go away? 

    I was very excited but now i'm just confused

  • August 17, 2014 at 1:46 am

    You could probably publish a book with all of this information. I'm glad to know that disputes don't actually have any risk to my channel. This knowledge certainly boosted my confidence in challenging claims, especially after submitting my first appeal. Thank you for not charging me $19.99 + tax in order to receive this information, haha.

  • August 31, 2014 at 10:03 pm

    Recently I have had a Happy Wheels gaming video flagged for "matched third party content". The claim is for visual content. The claim is not from a company but it's from a YouTuber called daneboe. The video doesn't contain any copyrighted content like clips from daneboe's videos or clips from TV shows/movies etc. I don't put music into my videos either. It's just commentary over the gameplay. I haven't disputed nothing yet. The video doesn't have many views (38 to be precise) or generates any revenue because I don't have a YouTube partnership yet.

    Any help or advice please? This is my first time coming upon a situation like this.

  • September 4, 2014 at 3:47 am

    Were are all your facts? and why do you treat people as idiots?

  • September 5, 2014 at 11:50 am

    Thanks for the help dude! I was concerned over all this copyright stuff as i'm not too 'expert' like when it comes to media. I'm glad you've cleared this up, also with the effort you put into this video more people need to know about this.

  • September 10, 2014 at 2:00 pm

    Hey! I'm a Youtube partner and I produce music. I've seen many people using my music in their videos and I was wondering if you could help me out with the Content ID.. How can I set up the Content ID so that I could control the videos that people upload using my musical content (monetize, views stats and so on..) ?
    Please let me know if you can.

    Thank you.

  • September 17, 2014 at 7:43 pm

    So if say five YouTubers are standing shoulder to shoulder filming a plane in the sky, and they all upload identical footage, the YouTuber with the CMS account will be deemed the owner by Google ? even though they all own their content.

  • October 3, 2014 at 2:58 pm

    very helpful video

  • October 17, 2014 at 6:06 am

    If the appeal is not reviewed in 30 days and you get your video back, Can the same company claim again for copyright on the same video?

  • October 20, 2014 at 2:54 pm

    Hi I have a doubt…. I was just wondering if these channels which make movie sins make money out of it, since most of the video is the movie or the 'copyrighted' content itself…..

  • December 7, 2014 at 10:45 pm

    Im i aloud to use music that i bought on iTunes or on a CD for my videos on YouTube ?
    And what about using parts of another video off YouTube for  my YouTube video ?
    And how does that work with making lyrics for a song ? 

  • December 23, 2014 at 12:07 pm

    Hey Jon. This is amazing.  I don't know why it took me this long to read it, but it's a great resource.  I just took a Media Law class this past semester and djd research specifically regarding Fair Use.  It's a convoluted mess, especially to us gamers and Let's Players.  I don't know if anything has changed in a year regarding YouTube, but this is a valuable resource for any Content Creator on YouTube.

  • December 24, 2014 at 12:36 pm

    Great video, very informative and concise… love the "escrow" idea. It's been a year since you made this – have they made any positive (for the uploader) policy changes since?

  • January 1, 2015 at 8:29 am

    When you upload a video of a Valve's game, and "third party" is/not Valve, you can give them a link to Valve Video Policy ( At least it works for me. ANYONE who claims that Still Alive in the end of Portal is their remix on… obviously Still Alive, can be disputed with Valve Video Policy. 
    I had only 3 claims on title music in the end of a game (Portal, Half-Life, Portal 2), and the all were REMIXES of original music from these games. 

  • January 3, 2015 at 12:49 am

    Very informative video; thank you for that! For someone who does youtube as a hobby, this packs the information neatly in 15 minutes. I am now less scared – though will still stick to indie games and companies I trust :p

  • January 9, 2015 at 11:49 am

    Now, I don't make any money off of my videos, and don't plan to. But I make videos similar to, if not, YTP styled videos using other videos on Youtube. In these edits I've used a decent portion of copyrighted material, but would that be disputable if I ever intended to monetize videos?

  • January 16, 2015 at 12:34 am

    Hi Jonathan
    I would like to know how FOX can file a copyright on a video transition from a software program that was shown in a video the subject of the video was not to do with the transition it was shown for 30 seconds maybe and was part of a software program shown in the video  really to me that is bogus, also do you know if it is possible for someone to be impersonating FOX and flagging videos?
    And that FOX wants to earn revenue for seeing their supposed video transition shows greed knows no limits.

    And one more thing your video is from 2013 I wonder is Youtube Policies have changed since then my guess would be they have seeing how the are constantly changing things to add to the confusion.

  • January 16, 2015 at 1:44 pm

    @Jogwheel Nice and helpful video, but I have a question: I received a copyright notice because 2 songs I used in my video weren't copyright-free, can I publish the video (without monetizing it) and still have no problems, because removing the song would ruin my video 🙁

  • January 18, 2015 at 7:45 pm

    I had to take two of my videos down because they were copyright claimed. And I didn't even monetize them. So why did I get hit?

  • February 4, 2015 at 11:50 pm

    Question Please Answer.  

    I am partnered with a gaming network and I know Nintendo is stingy with there games being on YouTube. 

    I am working on uploading Zelda The Wind Waker Gameplay videos and I know I won't be monetizing any of them. 

    I did click Acknowledged third party content. I am i safe?  I don't want any pink flags on my channel uploading the gameplay of zelda. I have about 22 parts still to upload.

    I just don't want to risk my partnership.  Please respond.  

    The copyright issues on the videos are:
    sound recording administered by: Nintendo
    Visual content administered by: Nintendo

    I do have this in my description:
    All Music "In game" and game content belongs to: 
    Kenta Nagata, Hajime Wakai, Toru Minegishi, Koji Kondo; 

    Website URL Here

  • February 8, 2015 at 1:42 pm

    Has YouTube taken any of your advice and put it into practice? A lot of what you was say makes sense, especially about the ''escrow'' or something similar

  • February 8, 2015 at 6:13 pm

    I have a question which is baffling me:
    I'm going through youtubes/audio libraray inwhich I can look up a song to see how the contents are viewed worldwide/limited etc. with the ad monetizaion allowed, I'm new to youtube and at the moment I dont care that these companies are making money off my vids. But I am still getting hit with copyright infringement. Do you know why? I figure that it being under the "ad monetization" section of the yourtube audio library would make it alright but I guess I'm wrong. I hope you can help…Thanks.

  • February 10, 2015 at 5:33 am

    Regarding monetization and ContentID claims, with regards to ad revenue that accrues while the dispute is in process, does the claimant actually receive that revenue during the process, or does Youtube at least wait until the claim has been resolved before sending money to one party or the other?  I'd have an issue if Youtube were to send ad revenue to a ContentID claimant for the period of the dispute if it eventually turned out that I had a legal right to post the content, and would have otherwise received the ad revenue during the period of the dispute.  Combined with the automated nature of the ContentID system, this would be a fundamental flaw to it.

    Edit: As I hadn't watched all the way to the end of the video before starting writing this comment, it does seem that what I thought was true, namely that the claimant would receive ad revenue, even if they weren't entitled to it.  While this may be true when this video was posted, is this still Youtube's policy?

    Although it has been near 14 months since the 'ContentID Apocalypse' occurred, it's a subject I've been looking into, as I'm getting setup to start producing content.

    Overall, very informative.

  • February 14, 2015 at 7:00 pm

    Wonderful video; I have been thinking of doing something similar for a while, though my video would be aimed more at the Classical musician audience; for me, issues of 'fair use' are just not relevant: 'Public Domain' is. (1922 is a very important date for me! 😉 )

    Unfortunately, your solution to the problem (the same as what I had wished, and for the same reasons, though I did not take the risk of trying to make a living on YouTube) is not, apparently, legally possible at the moment. I'll excerpt some text from some private correspondence between myself and someone who is an advisor to Google/YouTube:

    [Me]"The one change I would like to see – and so far as I am concerned, YouTube should have the power to do it – is that YouTube's partners *(who, in theory are going to an extra effort to provide quality content for YouTube to carry) should be 'given the benefit of a doubt' when a content ID match comes up. That is, rather than treating, persistently, repeatedly, their *Partners *as *criminals *who are stealing other people's content, the onus should be on the *claimant to prove that their claim is valid. I stress that this preferred treatment should be for YouTube Partners in good standing only – not someone who is registered with a MCN, and not for the average YouTuber. I fail to see why YouTube cannot do this, and it seems to me that it is to their advantage to do so (since a video makes no revenues while a claim is disputed, so far as I am aware)."

    [My Correspondent]"The fundamental issue is that the DMCA in particular lays down specific legal requirements regarding assumptions that are made about guilt or innocence related to a claim. It's that law that really needs to change, but any changes in the current political climate would probably do more harm than good — forces want to make it even tougher, not fairer….."

    I take this as meaning that the copyright holders get favoured treatment – are assumed innocent – and that it is not legally possible for YouTube to do as we both think would be most fair – NOT penalize the YouTuber while the review is in place. Perhaps holding the revenues in 'escrow' would be legally possible. If so, then that's the route they should take, but it would be perhaps more compliatd.

    I see that you are in a position to appreciate my frustration over multiple content ID matches, as well as lost income. Very stressful to wake up to in the morning.

    Tangentially, I had a claim on one of my videos (an upload of Chopin's Funeral March) by SonyATV that persisted for years. I disputed, they re-affirmed their claim and that was the end of it. I was basically told by YouTube that I had to work it out with Sony. This was back in 2008, and at that time the dispute processes available today were not in place. Multiple e-mails from myself to Sony were NEVER returned. I was on the point of paying money to hire a lawyer to create a letter to send them that they would be legally obligated to respond to, but then the claim simply vanished one day without comment.

    That video was my top video at the time and remains one of my top videos; Sony probably made a few hundred dollars off of my video during the time they claimed it (and I was unable to appeal – I don't think the counter-appeal was available at the time) and I was powerless at the time to prevent it.

    I am now curious to check out CMS for myself…. I saw the option for content ID a while back, but at the moment cannot remember where. I once came across a channel that had lifted several dozen videos from my site wholesale (as well as from other channels). At the time (two years back, I think) I could find no way to report this site.

    If I could implement CMS without unfairly penalizing others, that would possibly represent an extra revenue source for me, or at the very least I would have a better idea of just how much of my content is being re-uploaded.

    Anyway, thank you again for your behind-the-scenes explanations. I appreciate the efforts you went to as well to mitigate the length of the video, though I did end up watching the whole thing. Many people don't know how hard it is to keep talking so fast for so long. 😉

  • February 25, 2015 at 11:34 am

    I disputed a content ID. EMI Music Publishing and UMPG Publishing released the claim while Sony ATV Publishing rejected my dispute and reinstated the claim. I tried watching the video again and discovered that there were no copyright infringement.What do I need to do? I only run commentary and criticism of music tracks

  • May 29, 2015 at 5:17 pm

    +Jogwheel   – Perhaps the most important video I've ever watched…

    I was hoping to launch news/review based music channel soon. Sounds like fair use will cover me but I must be prepared to defend my rights and go through the appeals process as I am sure someone will be complaining about a few seconds of music clips, videos and images that I use in the videos.

  • June 23, 2015 at 3:32 am

    So just to be clear if one receives a matched third party content, you can file a dispute without risk of a strike? The worst case scenario is they reject your dispute and you're back to the same status as before?

  • July 3, 2015 at 10:51 pm

    Jon I have to 100% disagree with your comments at 9mins about gamers being upset. We are rightfully upset because it isn't even the gaming companies that are doing it. It is the music companies that license them the music they use in the games and they flag for 30s or less of background music. Let me give you an example…..I just uploaded 2 Fallout 3 let's play videos. One was 49mins long and the other 1hr 17mins.. Each one got flagged for three 30second clips each, 90s per video not by Bethesda mind you but by something called AdRev stating for a 3rd party. So it doesn't even show the party. they remain hidden and anonymous. To make it worse it says it can remain up and monetized but THEY get it all ! That audio constitutes less than 1-3% of the content, is background and not the main focus and yet they get all the money and you get none? A request from them to retain an appropriate percentage I could agree with but not that crap. So you do 99% of the work and yet you get nothing and they want it all for something that is not even a point in the video. It's like an extra in a movie getting Tom Cruise's salary because he was seen in a scene and Tom gets nothing. Who would put up with that crap? No one. Every video I have had flagged has been by a background music company for tiny 30s clips trying to take ALL of the money and Youtube is letting them get away with it.. Not once has it been the game maker.

  • July 6, 2015 at 9:15 pm

    So for some reason I got a bad standing for my comunity guidelines. But, how do you get it removed before 6 months.

  • July 9, 2015 at 4:53 am

    Ok I have a question, what if you don't get a copy right claim or  infringing content claim shown by the video you upload, but later a network indicates you have some type of copy right. But not aware because u never received notice, what can they do in that situation?

  • July 20, 2015 at 6:43 pm

    whao that was way load info's ? any updates in time lag till now ? then pls update it soon..

  • July 27, 2015 at 11:32 pm

    Very informative and good information for newbie like me.

  • August 25, 2015 at 4:05 am

    Thank you so much!

  • September 2, 2015 at 5:31 pm

    I have this question for a long time! If you're a musician and you put your music in some music distributors, they will add it to content ID and they take a share of your adsense revenue for that service. Can we apply for content ID without paying for the service?

  • September 12, 2015 at 2:34 am

    I'm trying to better understand Content ID and how it relates to a a work project. I understand that if I load a personal video and use a song, it will apply the option chosen by the Content ID. However, if I want to do it for a work project (say, for a promo video for our school) does the same rule apply or does the Content ID and/or copyright requirements change?

  • September 12, 2015 at 11:10 pm

    Do you have an opinion on the MCNs? Because they apparently can fuck channels up badly.

  • September 13, 2015 at 7:54 pm

    Hey Jon, this was really informative. Thanks for putting it together. Is this stuff still considered up to date, or have things significantly changed in the past 2 years?

  • September 15, 2015 at 7:13 pm

    if someone uploaded my video, how do they get automatic notification about third party matched, what should i do?

  • October 9, 2015 at 5:36 pm

    Hi Jon, if I uploaded a video with a song in it, and after getting flagged, got it cleared. Would it get flagged again if I uploaded the same song in another video? (I'm looking at using something from Audioblocks as a theme song). So would I have to keep disputing every video I upload do you think, even though it's the same piece of music?

  • October 17, 2015 at 7:32 am

    Its a very good explanation. I want to register my videos to youtube content id, so that no one can re upload my video. But the form is very confusing to fill. I don't know what youtube is asking to fill. Can you please tell me what to do?
    Or can you please mail me the details?
    This will be very helpful.
    Thank you..

  • November 12, 2015 at 1:45 am

    How do you apply for Content ID?

  • November 20, 2015 at 9:38 am

    how does one get a cms account? i have heard a lot about it being exploited by parties only interested in hijacking revenue while they wait out the appeals.
    are such reports legitimate? or just a misunderstanding of how this shit works?

  • December 17, 2015 at 5:13 pm

    hi Jogwheel. first of all thanx a lot for your video. i had a question though (maybe i missed something). i want to share videos from some other channels on my channel. there are some which say 'includes copyrighted content' and the monetizing policies go in favour of the original owner. that's ok for me. but there are some which i can share but there are no notices (neither blocked nor copyrighted content). is it then allowed and ok for me to share those? i don't want to run into any legal claims.

  • January 5, 2016 at 6:28 am

    Help! I'm using the youtube editor and using the music in the library and it keeps matching content ID's and won't let me monetize my videos?

  • January 31, 2016 at 12:38 pm

    Hello, We uploaded a video we made of a Christmas Concert. We wanted to upload as non-monetized because it contained songs that have copyright. In the version of Content ID we received a notice that we could 'share' monetize. Which meant we had to first set the video to monetize and then agree that the cover-song of the video had copyrighted content. Which we did do. We are currently waiting to see what happens.

    Our question is, if the video is taken down, does this automatically result in a Copyright Strike? We'd like to share the X-mas songs, but are happy to take the video down if it's not possible to do so.

  • January 31, 2016 at 9:18 pm

    2 years later and the same problems stated in the last two sections of this video still exist.

  • February 23, 2016 at 10:14 pm

    Did you originally have the #WTFU hashtag? Or add it recently? sigh Maybe the current noise will be loud enough to get noticed.

    Also looks like a legal fund to do the tedious slog to Supreme Court is gonna need to be part of the final solution.

  • March 1, 2016 at 1:24 am

    How would i go about protecting my content on youtube? Logo, name if i want to make a company, and prevent someone from going and reuploading my content and claiming it as there's so i dont get banned for being framed its not mine and being banned from youtube? That's happened to me and a friend before and i wasnt even monetizing the video's.

  • March 5, 2016 at 4:22 am

    i'm a musician. I upload piano covers of different songs. I play by myself still it is showing play match in most of my videos. what should I do?

    *********PLEASE REPLY*********

  • March 13, 2016 at 1:00 am

    Just having the money put into a separate account to be given to the winner might help so much.

  • April 3, 2016 at 1:03 pm


    nice video but one question. If I take content from some other you tube channel (for this example a song) that has a CC license and put in my commercial yt channel can this still be flagged as copyright strike.


  • May 7, 2016 at 2:46 am

    From what I've been reading through the various forms YouTube has posted, your account will start losing features when blocks are placed on the video. For this reason, I believe that automated blocks should not exist. Additionally, I also believe that anyone who is a verified YouTube partner should have a basic CMS account, that will simply notify the person who owns content that was matched with their own original video, as well as the options they can take. For a small channel like mine, aside from searching for my own content online, there is no way to easily to make sure my videos are not stolen.

  • May 13, 2016 at 9:54 am

    Well I just got a content ID match from a recording company that made a cover of ingame music from one of my gaming videos. The video game is one from 2005, and my video was uploaded in 2011 only contains its ingame music. The recording company claimed a copyright on one of the ingame tracks in 2013. I can understand if the company that released the video game filed ownership, but this recording company doesnt own the rights to the game or its in game audio!

  • May 14, 2016 at 2:35 am

    I watched your whole video and I am looking for some help/advice. I uploaded a let's play video of Uncharted 4. I received a copyright notice for visual content for 1 minute of game play that was not a cut scene and had no, music playing. I am thinking of disputing it but i have never done so before. The other option would be to, cut that minute out, re-render, re-upoad, and try again. What is your opinion on this?

  • May 19, 2016 at 9:46 pm

    Thank you sir!

  • May 29, 2016 at 2:10 pm

    good explaination. But try me too

  • May 30, 2016 at 11:54 pm

    I happen to sign with a Major Collective society that handles all Copyright issues
    Of Ugandan Music. But this society had signed another company before we signed.

    I believe this is not bad because non of us who signed with this collective society has
    exclusive rights Over Ugandan Music. We both signed a non Exclusive contract from
    that Society.

    My Biggest problem is that these people have refused to release my Videos. The other
    issue is, This same company that signed before me has been claiming some music that
     whose owners are not signed to that Collective society.

    I sent an email to these companies but non has complied and they are not
    releasing my Videos thus having copyright issues ( Content ID Claims) which
    are not allowing me to monitise.

    I need these people to release all my Videos and they should stop claiming
    my videos.

    Kindly Help me out because i have all the necessary documents and proof
    about this whole issue.

    If possible get back to me for help on [email protected]

  • June 4, 2016 at 11:09 am

    I would actually like to know something else, that your video doesn't cover. How do I apply to Youtube for Content ID protection for my videos? I can't find any instructions in Youtube's help info on this. I'd like to start making completely original stuff (not derivative works of other stuff), and would like to protect it for copyright violation, but Youtube doesn't tell people how to do it. How do I send samples of my videos to Youtube to use as reference frames in their Content ID system, to match against other people's uploaded videos? How do all the big companies like Viacom get enrolled in Youtube's Content ID system? In fact, a better question might be, how do the discover the procedure TO ENROLE? This information on how to enroll in Content ID protection is certainly not ANYWHERE in Youtube's support/help pages.

  • June 5, 2016 at 2:47 am

    Thank you. I did watch the whole thing. Someone used one of my songs on their video. First, I notified the person through his email contact on one of his many websites. He said he created the song and sent me a totally different song. I sent him a copy of the song from my computer and told him that he didn't seem to believe me. I filed a copyright infringement. The person then put an apology on my FB thread, where I was chatting about this problem. He wanted me to remove the complaint and said he would remove my song. He then deleted the FB posting and countered my copyright with a copyright notice of infrigement to me! YOUTUBE said that if I didn't file an injunction with a court, they would reinstate his video (with my music). How do I appeal to real person? I just wanted my song removed from video (over a million hits and who knows about sales???). I didn't ask for money. I just asked him to remove my song from his video. Then he'd have to repost the video without a million hits. And….how do I protect my songs? Mostly, I post them on Soundcloud. Thanks

  • June 18, 2016 at 9:14 pm

    Thanks for making this man!
    I'm currently dealing with what I believe to be a false claim [Merlin Engine] tryna claim they own a song that's free to use by another artist!!!!
    Personally I think only humans with proof of identity and proof of ownership should be allowed to make a Copyright Claim to begin with.
    Along with your suggestion of money being restored from an escrow, I would be the happiest kid in the world!

  • July 20, 2016 at 1:52 am

    How many coffees have you had before this

  • August 10, 2016 at 11:36 pm

    You are cool. Very usefull

  • August 11, 2016 at 12:54 am

    Smashed that like button big time! You helped a lot, loved the explanation

  • September 2, 2016 at 7:49 pm

    Why would talk so fast ? i can understand but, for learning n getting into brain ? u shud go little bit slow… as ur content is great …

  • October 4, 2016 at 8:22 am

    Hi–is there a specific number of copyright strikes we can get before they shut down your channel? BTW My channel is not monetized Thanks for this video.

  • October 12, 2016 at 8:15 am

    Thank you for sharing.

  • October 20, 2016 at 4:31 pm

    Very informative. Thanks for this video, well made and so much effort went into making it as user-friendly as possible.

  • November 17, 2016 at 6:31 am

    How do you get a CMS Account

  • November 29, 2016 at 6:14 pm

    Copy right stifles artistic expression as a whole and should be done away with completely.

  • December 8, 2016 at 10:58 am

    I was upload a video.. And now my video can't monitezed the copyrite idsue plz suggest what i do

  • December 12, 2016 at 2:48 am

    # WTFU

  • December 27, 2016 at 1:44 pm

    I didn't receive any strikes but all they did was block the video after receiving the copyright and I deleted the video did I do the wrong thing?

  • January 14, 2017 at 3:23 pm

    sir I m receiving no asset fix metadata problem while monetizing my videos . plz tell me how to fix it

  • January 26, 2017 at 10:29 pm

    You are frigging awesome! Although I don't upload, I know this helps a lot of youtubers and I want you to know it's appreciated.
    Cheers and take care!

  • February 9, 2017 at 11:19 am

    Very informative

  • February 13, 2017 at 2:13 pm

    MY 2 VIDEOS have copyrighted music the borderline remix and happy by Liam Lynch

  • February 19, 2017 at 9:38 am

    I rly need some advice/help with this. So I just posted a song cover and within minutes, I got a copyright claim by 8 claimants. It said it would allow me to still keep the video posted, but only bc the claimants will monetize it. I performed the guitar and vocals myself, I did not use audio from anywhere else. I'm also not making profit for any of my covers, I solely do it for my enjoyment and entertainment for others. So should I dispute the claim? Is it inevitable that I'll get copyright claims, even tho I played everything myself? Now I understand if I were to use a karaoke track along with my singing (which I'm considering for some videos in the future), but I find this case different. I hope someone can help me with this.

  • March 14, 2017 at 4:08 pm

    i used to play karaoke/instrument music in background while recording my voice in video, i have see there i got copyright content found on my video, so my question is that do i have to remove that background music or just let it run on my channel as it is??

  • March 22, 2017 at 1:38 am

    I recently started a YT channel specifically for LIVE streaming public domain horror movies with original content mixed in with it. All of the films I show are 100% public domain with no copyright restrictions. Old movies from decades ago. However, when I livestream it will get turned to "offline" within five minutes with a message saying a third-party copyright from audio/video has been detected. Is there anything I can do to stop this or am I out of luck?

  • April 3, 2017 at 8:25 am

    broadband tv id claim my video, are they legit

  • May 30, 2017 at 11:48 am

    What about book readings? Am I right in thinking that anything's ok if it is over 50 years old?

  • June 10, 2017 at 12:35 pm

    How can I see if I qualify for Content-ID if I can only insert 50% of my songs in the representative list when filling out the form?

  • June 27, 2017 at 7:30 pm

    I recently got a cc notice from Gameloft… I just made like a Playthrough but just played the game then I suddenly saw a copyright notice. I uploaded another video but this time it didn't have any copyright. I'm just a starting youtube channel a few days ago and I have a copyright notice already. I filed a Dispute but haven't got any reply. PLS HELP I NEED RESPONES AS IN ANYONE!!!

  • July 9, 2017 at 8:55 pm

    This is a great video. It's well thought out & well put together. Thanks for taking the time to make it!

  • September 4, 2017 at 9:42 am

    Here you go! Here is what you should put in the box if you want to file a dispute.
    Copyright disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.

  • October 17, 2017 at 5:41 am

    This video is amazing

  • October 31, 2017 at 9:53 am

    The YouTube team has single handedly ruined, ran down, and degraded YouTube into a meaningless nothing over the years!

  • November 18, 2017 at 4:18 am

    Owns an MCN = Untrustworthy

  • January 6, 2018 at 7:20 pm

    Great Video! Thanks for the contribution

  • June 21, 2018 at 5:05 pm

    So what happens once you’ve disputed it, and then you have to send your full name, address and other info to them? Is that WORTH the risk? Or will you be taken to court?! Had a few of those on my videos and decided to leave it as I didn’t want to be taken to court!! Do you guys push further once you have that claim? Or do you just leave it? My work often gets blocked :/ to the point where I want to walk away from youtube. I’m a film reviewer btw

  • July 15, 2018 at 5:04 pm

    How about if your a top 10 channel and you use 10-15 secs of a video.Would that be fair use because you transformed it and it is for education purpose?

  • July 20, 2018 at 2:52 am

    Hi I was giving permission to play and make videos but then I was copyrighted for the background music what is the best thing to do also is it ok to have some content Id claims every now and then for a few gaming videos

  • December 30, 2018 at 6:38 am

    Hi ive really enjoyed watching this video and i find it all very intresting. Ive been youtubing for over a year but ive had this channel since April 9th 2018 I uploaded a song in nightcore Usher Ft Juicy J I dont mind and that video got blocked in all countries so i deleted it. I have had a video muted By Rita Ora your songs. Copyright strikes from Calvin harris plus Copyright claims from various different songs cant remember them all!!!

  • January 4, 2019 at 10:15 pm

    I once got a content ID on a video for a song written by Ludwig Van Beethoven.

  • March 24, 2019 at 5:40 pm

    This, this small moment in my life, is called happiness. Great video!!

  • September 14, 2019 at 2:18 am

    Excellent video. I'd like to know if voiceover parodies of movies (e.g. substituting Darth Vader's lines with lines from another movie character like Deadpool) constitute fair use (not the whole movie, just the parts with relevant dialogue). I have an idea for one but I don't want to waste my time developing a video that YouTube is going to block. I absolutely do not intend to monetize it. And I wouldn't mind Disney monetizing it for themselves, but their default Content ID setting is to block it. I'd appreciate any advice you could offer.

  • October 8, 2019 at 10:53 am

    1 sec of music or short clip and you'll get an email from youtube about content ID!


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *