Anyone have experience disputing Music Parodies?

Blocky

I've Got It
Joined
Jul 6, 2014
Messages
161
Reaction score
56
My first video is a music parody of Wiggle by Jason Derulo and I recently got a third party content match on it. I disputed it with the belief that the video I made is a parody, which was why I made it in the first place, and two out of five responses so far is "dispute rejected", and I'm most certain the other three responses will be the same.

I don't know if its against the forum rules, but if you have any experience in dealing with parodies, can you give my video a look to see if you would consider it a parody, so I can re-appeal?

Or if it falls under satire, which if it is, I would not appeal any further and let the copyright holders put ads on my channel (which they are already doing) and hope that they won't delete it later and give me my first strike.

Thanks for reading!
 

Restart

Loving YTtalk
Joined
Oct 26, 2013
Messages
278
Reaction score
61
Location
Oregon
Website
www.youtube.com
Channel Type
Youtuber
two out of five responses so far is "dispute rejected", and I'm most certain the other three responses will be the same.
Wait so you disputed it 5 times?
Also the third party match is automatic and it found yours most likely because you were still using the karaoke version of the song even though you sung over it. A human being didn't look at the video and found it to be violating someone's copyrights. If you don't own the copyright of the song you might get away with using the "Fair Use" options. So it also really depends on how you defend yourself on the dispute part.
 

Blocky

I've Got It
Joined
Jul 6, 2014
Messages
161
Reaction score
56
Wait so you disputed it 5 times?
Also the third party match is automatic and it found yours most likely because you were still using the karaoke version of the song even though you sung over it. A human being didn't look at the video and found it to be violating someone's copyrights. If you don't own the copyright of the song you might get away with using the "Fair Use" options. So it also really depends on how you defend yourself on the dispute part.
Hey, thank you for replying and no not 5 times, hah. Content ID matched and Five companies claim the instrumental that is used.

I've disputed the first time saying it was fair use as it is a parody on how poorly the video and lyrics were lazy written, and two out of the five company so far rejected my dispute, and I'm sure the other three company will reject my dispute too.

That's why I asked if my video was considered a parody, so I can decide to re-appeal for the second time.

Again, thank you for replying.
 

Restart

Loving YTtalk
Joined
Oct 26, 2013
Messages
278
Reaction score
61
Location
Oregon
Website
www.youtube.com
Channel Type
Youtuber
Yeah parody is diffidently a strong case of fair use. It's also one of the only one that allows you to use more of the original content. In your case, I think your work is a parody instead of a satire.

http:// fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/what-is-fair-use/
 

Blocky

I've Got It
Joined
Jul 6, 2014
Messages
161
Reaction score
56
Yeah parody is diffidently a strong case of fair use. It's also one of the only one that allows you to use more of the original content. In your case, I think your work is a parody instead of a satire.

http:// fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/what-is-fair-use/
Thanks, man. I'm a bit more confident when its time to re-appeal this. Hopefully a human being will actually read the dispute and not just skimming it.
 

Fiasco

I've Got It
Joined
Jul 29, 2014
Messages
146
Reaction score
56
Channel Type
Youtuber
I'm new to this forum and had a quick look at your video. I'm not sure of the rules that make something a parody but yours looks like one to me. I just wanted to let you know for future reference that it's a little hard to hear your voice over the music in some parts so you may want to keep that in mind for next time. Good luck with your dispute.
 

Tarmack

Rhetorical Porcupine
Joined
May 29, 2012
Messages
3,770
Reaction score
1,926
I haven't watched it (and can't as I'm at work). Are you using the song in order to make fun of the song or the artist? Or are you using the song to make fun of something else? This is the basic difference between Parody and Satire per copyright law.

I'll use Weird Al as an example. Two songs. Smells Like Nirvana is a song that would fall under the definition of Parody. In order to make fun of an artist, a very clear case can be made that using a song from that artist is a required element. So by covering Smells Like Teen Spirit, and using it to make fun of Nirvana, the connection and requirement is clear.

On the other hand, using Coolios' song Gangsta's Paradise to make fun of the Amish in Amish Paradise is a Satire. There is no obvious connection between the song chosen and the topic of humour. The question that is asked by the copyright holder is "Couldn't you have used somebody elses song?". If the answer to that question is yes, then more often than not you've got a Satire, not a Parody.

Alot of people simply think that making a funny song cover is automatically a parody, but the only ones protected under Fair Use are those where you really couldn't have conceivably used a different song.
 

nb001

Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2014
Messages
17
Reaction score
8
Just for the sake of discussion, let's say your performance is a parody and the backing music was from a karaoke track, I'd imagine a claim is coming from the company that owns the sound recording copyright on that track (not the composition). I bet their side of the argument is based on the fact that even though a parody of a composition is being performed, the sound recording backing the new lyrics is not being parodied, and is covered under a separate copyright. The dialog surrounding the area of sound recording copyright and parody defense is fascinating. There was a similar question posted on avvo (legal forum) and the response of the IP lawyer, Maurice Ross explains in depth: avvo.com/legal-answers/can-i-write-parodies-of-songs--use-karaoke-tracks--1507931.html

best of luck!
 

Blocky

I've Got It
Joined
Jul 6, 2014
Messages
161
Reaction score
56
I'm new to this forum and had a quick look at your video. I'm not sure of the rules that make something a parody but yours looks like one to me. I just wanted to let you know for future reference that it's a little hard to hear your voice over the music in some parts so you may want to keep that in mind for next time. Good luck with your dispute.
Thanks. Yeah we used a really cheap mic for it since it was our first video, heh.[DOUBLEPOST=1406766210,1406765104][/DOUBLEPOST]
I haven't watched it (and can't as I'm at work). Are you using the song in order to make fun of the song or the artist? Or are you using the song to make fun of something else? This is the basic difference between Parody and Satire per copyright law.

I'll use Weird Al as an example. Two songs. Smells Like Nirvana is a song that would fall under the definition of Parody. In order to make fun of an artist, a very clear case can be made that using a song from that artist is a required element. So by covering Smells Like Teen Spirit, and using it to make fun of Nirvana, the connection and requirement is clear.

On the other hand, using Coolios' song Gangsta's Paradise to make fun of the Amish in Amish Paradise is a Satire. There is no obvious connection between the song chosen and the topic of humour. The question that is asked by the copyright holder is "Couldn't you have used somebody elses song?". If the answer to that question is yes, then more often than not you've got a Satire, not a Parody.

Alot of people simply think that making a funny song cover is automatically a parody, but the only ones protected under Fair Use are those where you really couldn't have conceivably used a different song.
Thanks for the examples, I really did needed some.

I am making fun of the song, that was my intent from the beginning when I parodied the song. Also, in some subtle way I'm also making fun of the artists since their lyrics were crap to begin with by being dull/smug in the video.
My video replaced the lyrics as if the artists in the video was hungry especially Snoop Dogg's original rap part.

Just for the sake of discussion, let's say your performance is a parody and the backing music was from a karaoke track, I'd imagine a claim is coming from the company that owns the sound recording copyright on that track (not the composition). I bet their side of the argument is based on the fact that even though a parody of a composition is being performed, the sound recording backing the new lyrics is not being parodied, and is covered under a separate copyright. The dialog surrounding the area of sound recording copyright and parody defense is fascinating. There was a similar question posted on avvo (legal forum) and the response of the IP lawyer, Maurice Ross explains in depth: avvo.com/legal-answers/can-i-write-parodies-of-songs--use-karaoke-tracks--1507931.html

best of luck!
Damn, based on that article I guess I can't dispute since the the background music wasn't transform (Idk if it was or not since I got it from one of the youtube videos).

Thanks guys, I guess I can't win with the background music argument. Hopefully they still keep my video up and put ads on it and won't give me a strike, ha.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fiasco