30 Seconds of Copyrighted Music!

[HashtagConn]

Hey everyone!

As YouTubers, you all know that copyright sucks and they can take down your video and blah blah blah.

ANYWAYS, I've heard this rumor for quite a long time now and I'm sick of reading answers from non-YouTubers who don't have a clue about this. My question for you is, do you think YouTube allows up to 30 seconds of copyrighted music?

I'm guilty for listening to this rumor and I've used less than 30 seconds of copyrighted music and have not yet been flagged. (Please do not go to my channel to purposely flag my content lol)

I would appreciate it if you could give me your personal opinion based on your experience, as well as what the actual rules are. Of course, I encourage all feedback. The more answers I get, the more help I'll receive.

Peace!

 

[Super Pawsitive]

I've used less than 15 seconds of music in the past and have gotten strikes for it. So no. That isn't true. It's just a matter if YouTube's content ID system is able to pin down the music you used. If they can't detect it, no harm done.

 

[Sinc]

"Copyright sucks" what?, what if i came into your house and took a sip of your soda and put it back in the fridge, i will tell everyone it tasted good(Give you credit) but i cant give you back that sip. I cant explain it any clearer than how i just did, dont use copyright anything because its not yours.

 

[Super Pawsitive]

"Copyright sucks" what?, what if i came into your house and took a sip of your soda and put it back in the fridge, i will tell everyone it tasted good(Give you credit) but i cant give you back that sip. I cant explain it any clearer than how i just did, dont use copyright anything because its not yours.

You can argue that the Content ID system on YouTube sucks.

"Oh, you've worked days and days at a time to make a 1 hour documentary on why video games are important? That's cool, but you used about 10 seconds of the main theme of Super Mario Bros. So we're just going to reroute any ad-revenue to Nintendo because you CLEARLY did not create any of this content."

 

[Sinc]

You can argue that the Content ID system on YouTube sucks.

"Oh, you've worked days and days at a time to make a 1 hour documentary on why video games are important? That's cool, but you used about 10 seconds of the main theme of Super Mario Bros. So we're just going to reroute any ad-revenue to Nintendo because you CLEARLY did not create any of this content."

"I didn't know it was your juice, it was in my fridge, i mean its everybody's fridge and we are sharing it but i didn't know it was your juice", ^^....tomato ,tomato, what is not yours is not yours.

 

[CtrlAltDelicious]

I can understand the copyright laws. If I had put work into making something, I would want people to at least get my permission before using it. On the other hand, I see the other side's point too. Is it worth forcing a user to take down a whole video because a small percentage of it uses a song? Maybe not. I think it differs with every case. But regardless of where you side, better safe than sorry. Either find non copyrighted music (there's plenty out there), buy the rights to music (also plenty of websites that offer this), or get direct permission from the artist so that even if you get a strike, you can argue it with written permission from the content's creator.

 

[Tarmack]

"I didn't know it was your juice, it was in my fridge, i mean its everybody's fridge and we are sharing it but i didn't know it was your juice", ^^....tomato ,tomato, what is not yours is not yours.

Nah, there is a valid argument for some of it. Reviews are a good example. The OP just has no comprehension of what copyright means. Long and short of it is there is no such "under X seconds is ok" rule.

 

[TheSuperFunArt]

Once I used 2 seconds and got a strike

 

[Super Pawsitive]

"I didn't know it was your juice, it was in my fridge, i mean its everybody's fridge and we are sharing it but i didn't know it was your juice", ^^....tomato ,tomato, what is not yours is not yours.

I don't feel like this analogy is a good one, so let me offer you one that might be a bit better.

It's like baking a cake. There are many ingredients that go into baking a cake. You have the milk, the eggs, the flour, the butter...but no sugar. So you go to your friend and you ask if you could borrow some of his sugar, and in return you invite him to SOME of your cake. You don't invite him to have the entire cake, because most of the ingredients were YOURS.

Now try to justify taking down an hour long video for 10 seconds of copyrighted music.

 

[Tarmack]

I don't feel like this analogy is a good one, so let me offer you one that might be a bit better.

It's like baking a cake. There are many ingredients that go into baking a cake. You have the milk, the eggs, the flour, the butter...but no sugar. So you go to your friend and you ask if you could borrow some of his sugar, and in return you invite him to SOME of your cake. You don't invite him to have the entire cake, because most of the ingredients were YOURS.

Now try to justify taking down an hour long video for 10 seconds of copyrighted music.

Barring certain fair use reasons, taking a video down for 10 seconds of material used without permission is perfectly valid. It is the ContentID monetization theft where they choose to leave the content up but take 100% of the revenue that is the real problem.