• Join the largest paid sponsorship network. No contracts, no gimmicks, get paid quick. New sponsorships are added daily. Join at famebit.com

Monetization while showing copyrighted photos, music, or video, within a video

kevin392

New Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2019
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hello,

My name is Kevin and I am new to youtube and trying to wrap my head around monetization of videos while including copyrighted material within a created video.

For example, there are hundreds, if not thousands, of celebrity-orientated channels where youtubers display different celebrity photos which are likely copyrighted by the photographer. In my case, I wish to upload some videos discussing certain bands and within my video, I'd like to show several photos of them from past to present. The photos would likely be copyrighted to somebody. Is a person within fair-use to display copyrighted photos when describing someone and if not, how the heck do so many people get away with it with slide shows?

Another example is using a video within a video...think reaction videos...I have seen reaction videos spike in popularity and it appears many get away with monetizing it. Many of the videos feature music and official promo videos by the artists and I wonder what happens when the artist claims rights to the video with content ID. When content ID happens, doesn't all monetization of that video cease for the uploader? The same could be asked about audio. I, personally, have had content ID claims for having 5 seconds of copyrighted audio that was picked up by my phone, while walking through a store.

Very confused.
 

Shakycow

I Love YTtalk
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Messages
878
Reaction score
462
Channel Type
Animator
You're only seeing the ones who have yet to be caught. You can't see the thousands (millions) that have already been taken down or those who are claimed by another party.

Their technology only continues to get better and better. At some point, any footage used without permissions will be found. Is it worth the risk?
 

Illuminated Nerd

Active Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2018
Messages
33
Reaction score
36
Age
40
Channel Type
Reviewer
Another example is using a video within a video...think reaction videos...I have seen reaction videos spike in popularity and it appears many get away with monetizing it.
Reaction videos are in a grey area considered "commentary" and part of "fair-use". As far as I'm concerned (personal opinion), it's fairly unoriginal content. Some people get away with monetizing it... it's still bad content :) News & Parody are in the same category, but are generally seen more positively in that regard.

When content ID happens, doesn't all monetization of that video cease for the uploader?
A content ID claim is just means a piece of copyrighted content was tagged/identified in a video. What happens to the video after that is up to to how the copyright owner has configured their claim on that content. They can opt to monetize the video themselves, block all monetization on the video (i.e. demonetized), allow the owner to monetize the content and they take a "cut", or even that the owner can take monetize the entire video. Some copyright holders just want to know how much their content is being used and still allow it, and some copyright holders are Disney. Beware the Disney :)
 

thefourwinds

Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2019
Messages
19
Reaction score
4
Think of it this way, if you talk about a particular band and happen to use small parts of their music video and have a discussion video about it.. would/should they be upset by it? Fair use allows for review or parody of copyrighted content; and your video is probably also generating hype for that particular musician as well. If a large Youtube channel promotes a small musician (for free), do you think that musician would sue them for it. Reaction videos are similar in idea -- a channel with 3 million subscribers who do a reaction video on a movie trailer, for example, is indirectly promoting that movie. Heck, they should get paid by the movie producers to make that kind of video.
 

Tito Tims Videos

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 11, 2019
Messages
60
Reaction score
28
Age
55
Location
Iloilo, Philippines
Website
www.youtube.com
Channel Type
Vlogger
It feels like fair use is getting lost in the copyright claim feeding frenzy. But, it seems like audio gets flagged faster, and more often, than pics or vid clips. Probably because it is easier for them to scan for. I just try not to use anything that might get flagged. Better safe than sorry (but making travel vids, music is really my main concern)
 

UKHypnotist

I Love YTtalk
Joined
Nov 25, 2012
Messages
1,520
Reaction score
631
Age
62
Location
Market Harborough, Leicestershire, England
Channel Type
Musician
The bottom line here is this.

YouTube is looking for original and unique content to monetize. If a person uses copyrighted content in their video, it's not only not their original and unique content, but may violate both YouTube's Terms of Service regarding unlicensed copyright content (I am assuming here that you aren't planning to license the media you include in the videos; if I am mistaken, you have my advance apology), Adsense Content Policy on attempted monetization of third party copyright content, and YouTube Partner Programme policy, which says that you must own the rights to every bit of content in your videos; and this includes commercial use rights, and publicity rights.

In addition, channels with multiple Content ID claims are automatically rejected for monetization at review. When it comes to the YouTube Partner Programme Compliance Review, Fair Use normally goes right out the window; as most people who claim it are claiming it from a point of ignorance, and don't truly know what Fair Use is, or how the doctrine is applied to media.
 

thefourwinds

Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2019
Messages
19
Reaction score
4
In addition, channels with multiple Content ID claims are automatically rejected for monetization at review. When it comes to the YouTube Partner Programme Compliance Review, Fair Use normally goes right out the window; as most people who claim it are claiming it from a point of ignorance, and don't truly know what Fair Use is, or how the doctrine is applied to media.
I wonder why you want to propagate false information like this. Content ID claims are computer generated, whereas monetization requires a human approver. Multiple Content ID claims are NOT automatically rejected, but are decided on a case-by-case basis. In addition, while most people who claim fair use are ignorant of what is fair use; I can assure you that Fair Use cases can be won in court. Reaction videos may not make the cut, but there is a reason why large movie review channels exist.
 

UKHypnotist

I Love YTtalk
Joined
Nov 25, 2012
Messages
1,520
Reaction score
631
Age
62
Location
Market Harborough, Leicestershire, England
Channel Type
Musician
I am not propagating false information.

If the human reviewer sees multiple copyright claims, they will know that the content claimed doesn't belong to the channel owner applying for monetization and is therefore not their original and unique content, and therefore reject the channel for monetization. These days, YouTube seems to be utilising a policy of either all of your content is monetizable, or none of it is. YouTube is also now using algorithmic review to demonetize existing YPP channels which qualified under the previous rule set.

I take it that you are completely unaware of YouTube's recent adoption of the AdSense Content Quality Guidelines, which names content from third party sources as "reused content", and states that channels dedicated to such content (among other types), cannot be monetized?

I don't bear the badge of a Google Product Expert in the area of YouTube for the fun of it. Here is the link you want to read.

https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/1311392?hl=en-GB

Here are the exact sections, quoted for your convenience.

"Monetising third-party content: Make sure that you're adding value to any third-party content that you monetise, and that your content has significant original commentary, educational value or editorialised statement.
Content quality guidelines

AdSense content policies are extensive and include quality guidelinesfrom the Webmaster/Search Console policies. We've highlighted some of the most relevant policies for YouTube creators below.

Reminder: These guidelines apply to your channel overall. If we find that a channel is dedicated to content that doesn't meet our guidelines, the channel may be suspended from the Partner Programme.

Make sure that your content adds value, and is unique and relevant.We've included some examples of content that doesn't meet these standards, which means that it can't be monetised. This list is not exhaustive.

  • Reused content. This is content that doesn't provide significant original commentary or educational value. It may also mean that we've identified that large portions of your channel either completely match other content, or are noticeably similar. Examples include:
    • Third-party videos stitched together with minimal-to-no changes
    • Third-party content compiled without a narrative
    • Content uploaded somewhere else first
    • Content uploaded many times by multiple users"
YouTube is not a court of law, either. Yes Fair Use cases can be won in a court of law, but YouTube isn't going to take the time to go into court over movie review channels that get demonetized. In fact, since demonetization wouldn't involve a copyright claim or strike, how would a demonetized movie review channel even initiate a Fair Use case in court? You seem to forget that monetizing copyrighted content invalidates one of the Four Factors of Fair Use.

Finally, I'd like to suggest that you have a close look at the current YouTube Help Community Monetization section, found at:

https://support.google.com/youtube/threads?hl=en-GB&thread_filter=(category:monetization)

If you can get past all of the "Monetize my channel" threads that we Product Experts are currently ignoring, and find some which have been answered, you will certainly find some where "channel diagnostics" have been done by Product Experts, and amongst these, there are certain to be a few where a Product Expert other than myself has stated that channels with multiple Content ID claims will not be monetized by YouTube.
 
Last edited: