Creative commons and third party content issue

[Spyda]

So I have uploaded a video that has matched for third party content for a track I got from a site that allows music under Creative Commons license 3.0

But YouTube has matched to a track that sounds from listening to it to be the same tune but that has been released by the site on a compilation album through a record company but under a different track title though it mentions the websites address, although have disputed the claim and also emailed the sites owner I just wondered if anyone has any idea about how this would work.

If a creative commons track is released either with the same or different title is the CC 3.0 license still valid?

 

[WolfWraith]

What website did you use? What's the link to the specific song's page?

 

[Spyda]

I used AudioNautix.com, their website says in footer all music is available under creative commons, the direct link to song is this:

audionautix.com/~audion/Music/RunningWaters.mp3

as cannot link to the page its on but it comes under Meditative for genre.

Hope that will display!

 

[WolfWraith]

Ah I'm familiar with that site Mr Sark uses it alot as well. I had a similar issue with Bensound.com and a song called "Creepy". If the song title is different it's probably the content ID system just being bad again. Wait for confirmation from the website first to see what they say.

Does the song sound the same as the 1 you used?

 

[Spyda]

Yes, and the problem lies with the song category on AudioNautix is the same song category of the one released by the label it states on YouTube as the matched content.

For comparison its track 6 here: routenote.com/r/DrHead/5051813686788

 

[WolfWraith]

Yes, and the problem lies with the song category on AudioNautix is the same song category of the one released by the label it states on YouTube as the matched content.

For comparison its track 6 here: routenote.com/r/DrHead/5051813686788

Damn I was gonna say if it was a different song dispute it, if it's the exact same song though, wait for the Audionautix to contact you, I'm not 100% knowledgeable in copyright, so can't say who has right of way here. Could be Audionautix forgot about it, could be the other company used Audionautix's material or something. In my situation with Bensound the guy confirmed that the song was different and said to dispute it, but I had already disputed it due to the license rights.

 

[Spyda]

I have also already disputed it under license rights, have also raised a ticket with my MCN so guess now will have to wait and see what both my MCN, YouTube and AudioNautix say about this matter, hopefully they won't take too long so can re-monetize it.

 

[WolfWraith]

I have also already disputed it under license rights, have also raised a ticket with my MCN so guess now will have to wait and see what both my MCN, YouTube and AudioNautix say about this matter, hopefully they won't take too long so can re-monetize it.

The longest it can take is up to 30days. That's the duration that YouTube gives the other party to review your dispute and respond to it. Sometimes it's quick and gets resolved within a few days.

 

[Spyda]

Well hopefully will be sorted quicker but have contacted the original owner by email and my MCN for help, if it takes 30days so be it but hopefully between the content owner, my mcn and youtbe will be sorted asap!

 

[Tarmack]

This is most commonly the result of a Content owner doing a remix or other work with the CC material and it being auto-claimed inside of ContentID. I had a similar issue with Heroes of the Storm using the Karazhan them from World of Warcraft. Someone else had done a remix with it and I got a claim. Basic dispute and it got released towards the end of the 30 days. Personally, I think the max timeframe on disputes should be a week. If the claim can be instant, then the dispute process needs to be faster.