• Join the largest paid sponsorship network. Join at YTtalk.com

The Orchard Music Claims

Status
Not open for further replies.

GamingHappens

HEY LOOK! a distraction!
Joined
Apr 5, 2013
Messages
1,359
Reaction score
508
Channel Type
Gamer
I came to this section on yttalk to ask this same question! they claimed like all of kevin macleoid. (incompetech), and I have a combined of 50,000 views on all my videos that have "The Orchard Music" claims. I submitted an appeal or whatever an I've heard nothing... some random company is STEALING my money. This is very illegal, this company needs to be reported for fraud!
Well they have to answer the appeal so tell me what the results are[DOUBLEPOST=1398767314,1398767209][/DOUBLEPOST]
Then you know they are a legitimate company in which a majority stake is owned by Sony. If you're familiar with IODA as well, you'll also know that this particular group is responsible for managing a huge amount of digital copyright licenses. If you are then familiar with those two things, it's a pretty short step from there to see how a song from a video game with a licensed soundtrack could in fact be distributed and managed by this group. You can find all of the anecdotal evidence that you like, but the fact of the matter is that when a huge company like this claims to own/manage a piece of content, it is only one of two possibilities. Either they do own/manage that content, or a mistake has been made. Neither of those two concepts falls under the terminology of illegitimate company or scam.

If you genuinely believe that you have the rights to use that song, then you go through and fight it. Personally, I'm not sure you do have the rights to use it. Valve has given monetization permission, but without knowing what their license agreement for the song Still Alive looks like, we have no idea whether they're even permitted to give you music permission. This is especially true since I suspect strongly that Jonathan Coulton probably still owns the song and licensed it out to Sony for distribution. I doubt very strongly that Valve even owns it.
Well like andrew said, they claim royalty free music, music that is user owned, and they even tried to claim the star spangled banner song.
 

Toto Yamangtunay

New Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2015
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Age
49
The music in my videos are MY OWN original musical arrangement of songs at our church. I have gathered almost 2.4 millions of views from them from the time I created my channel in 2009. I never knew about monetization, and it was not until January 2014 only that I started earning money from my videos. Then I sort of slacked from posting new videos.

Just recently I checked my channel and was surprised to discover that starting June 2015 my videos stopped earning money. And was shocked to know that The Orchard Music have claimed copyright to my videos and the money earned from my videos instead has now been redirected to them. This is complete SCAM as the music is my own original MIDI arrangement, with complete orchestral music. The church that published the original work had only released simple piano versions that were being used as accompaniment in congregation singing. I have filed a dispute and not sure what will come out of this. I have privatized the videos in question to stop The Orchard Music from milking money from my work.
 

UKHypnotist

I Love YTtalk
Joined
Nov 25, 2012
Messages
1,710
Reaction score
684
Age
63
Location
Market Harborough, Leicestershire, England
Channel Type
Musician
When you have videos containing copyrighted music and video descriptions that break the YouTube ToS I don't think you can really start talking about illegal :p

By misleadingly tagging videos you are stealing advertiser's money.
I am very sorry to jump into this so late: however...

Kevin McLeod of Incompetech is a major royalty-free music producer. While he does have commercial licensing available, he also does attributable Creative Commons licensing. The below is taken directly from the Incompetech site:

Available Licenses:

Please choose one of the licenses below listed to continue...

There is no charge for a Creative Commons license. It does require that you credit the music.
Select the titles, copy and paste the resulting credits into your work!
$0

The Standard License is available for projects where attribution is not wanted or is otherwise impossible. (radio ad, TV ad, corporate presentation, commercial short, on-hold music, etc.)
Select the titles, fill out your info, download the resulting PDF license, pay with PayPal!
1 Piece: $30
2 Pieces: $25 each
3 or more: $20 each

Retail License
For retail, restaurant, spa, and similar physical locations.
$95 for 10 years.

So far, I don't see anything about The Orchard on his site; will keep looking. Note: The Content ID System is not applicable to royalty-free elements subject to multi-license deals. So if Mr. McLeod's music is in there it is indeed in there illegally as this is not a type of music Content ID is made to target!

I'd like to add that Sony or no Sony, I've also been targeted by The Orchard, and on either music I composed myself, royalty-free elements which had no business in the Content ID system in the first place, or my own recorded voice doing hypnosis sessions! I will show you how I got them off my back via email in one case.

"My name is Jocelyn Jensen. I own multiple YouTube channels and I am sick and tired of being targeted by your organization for the use of perfectly legal material. Linked below is the targeted video; this email is also being copied to Bjorne Lynne, owner of Shockwave-Sound.com, from which I have licensed in perpetuity, the royalty-free music collection Future Forever by ION. Attached to this email please find a copy of both my license AND Cue Sheet Info supplied by the publishing house.

(link removed due to non-VIP status)

Too much more from you, and I shall consider contacting a Intellectual Property Specialist solicitor with an eye to filing a formal Cease and Desist Order against your organization on the grounds of continuing frivolous and unfounded legal harassment.

I remain,

Jocelyn L. H. Jensen C.Ht, Dip. Hyp, BHRTI"

And in the second case,

"Hello.

My name is Jocelyn Jensen. I own multiple YouTube Channels. A few weeks ago YouTube's Content ID bot targeted one of my videos. As the only content in that video was legally licensed stock footage and my voice at the timestamp on the tag, and I can prove the NON-Exclusive Licensing on the stock footage seen at that point in the video, the only thing left for The Orchard to be claiming copyright in is my recorded voice.

If The Orchard is claiming copyright in my recording and my voice, then I believe that The Orchard owes me royalties...yes? The video in question is linked below. I am fully prepared to both file a full DMCA Counter-Notice and retain legal counsel in this matter should it become necessary.

(video link removed due to non-VIP status)

I Remain,

Jocelyn L. H. Jensen"

The Orchard can be dealt with; if you have the courage to stand up for yourself and also happen to be in the right! In both of these cases, less than an hour had passed before the illegal claims were removed.
 
Last edited:

RyanH

Loving YTtalk
Joined
Nov 27, 2015
Messages
262
Reaction score
82
The Orchard is not entirely comprised of fraud, although they've been known to make false Content ID claims or reject valid disputes. I recommend emailing them, as they deal with a huge number of copyrights.

If you know that you're in the right completely, dispute the claim. If they reject the claim, appeal the rejected claim and you should win providing the claim was made erroneously.
 

Idec Sdawkminn

Horror Versions
Joined
Apr 21, 2015
Messages
1,867
Reaction score
858
Age
37
Location
Where angels lose their way...
Channel Type
Other
I've only had them claim the "I Love You" song from the kids show Barney and Friends. Not sure how they fit in with that song, but I disputed it and they rejected it to no surprise. I'll let you know how they react to the appeal once I get this other strike off my account and I can appeal rejections again.
 

Idec Sdawkminn

Horror Versions
Joined
Apr 21, 2015
Messages
1,867
Reaction score
858
Age
37
Location
Where angels lose their way...
Channel Type
Other
Now that I got my previous strike from IFPI removed by counter-notification, I can appeal rejected disputes again and one of the 2 I'm appealing is the "I Love You" song from the Barney show, which was claimed by The Orchard Music. I'll report back here on how that goes. From what I'm reading on here, though, it will most likely result in the video getting taken down and me receiving another strike.
 

RyanH

Loving YTtalk
Joined
Nov 27, 2015
Messages
262
Reaction score
82
All claims are via assets which take a long time to setup and need alot of information.
When something goes wrong, 99% of the time it's a YouTube issue not the asset the content claimer uploaded.
Also disputes are checked manually.

So I'm pretty sure in this case they do own the rights...

As for many people having the same issue, when they are the 2-3rd biggest music rights management company on YouTube, there's bound to be complainers, they likely claim 10s of 1000s of videos monthly.[DOUBLEPOST=1398685609,1398685194][/DOUBLEPOST]
There you go
Uploading an asset into Content ID is as simple as uploading a YouTube video. In fact, it is. The vast majority of assets are just standard youtube.com uploads by the main CMS channel, it's as simple as the channel owner ticking a box to "enable Content ID matches" on their video and selecting a policy. Videos that are uploaded by CID / CMS users do not have to be approved by YouTube. YT will however occasionally audit Content ID claims and assets and deactivate problematic assets and address cases of intentional abuse.

Uploading a new asset into Content ID is instant and will become effective immediately for new uploads (it will take around 6 months for the system to fully scan and identify matches in every single YouTube video previously uploaded)

The YouTube Content ID system is extremely accurate, the problems that occur are almost always due to someone with Content ID access uploading an asset that features content they do not fully own the rights to. It's very easy to do, and people forget to exclude the segments they do not own from matches.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UKHypnotist

UKHypnotist

I Love YTtalk
Joined
Nov 25, 2012
Messages
1,710
Reaction score
684
Age
63
Location
Market Harborough, Leicestershire, England
Channel Type
Musician
Uploading an asset into Content ID is as simple as uploading a YouTube video. In fact, it is. The vast majority of assets are just standard youtube.com uploads by the main CMS channel, it's as simple as the channel owner ticking a box to "enable Content ID matches" on their video and selecting a policy. Videos that are uploaded by CID / CMS users do not have to be approved by YouTube. YT will however occasionally audit Content ID claims and assets and deactivate problematic assets and address cases of intentional abuse.

Uploading a new asset into Content ID is instant and will become effective immediately for new uploads (it will take around 6 months for the system to fully scan and identify matches in every single YouTube video previously uploaded)

The YouTube Content ID system is extremely accurate, the problems that occur are almost always due to someone with Content ID access uploading an asset that features content they do not fully own the rights to. It's very easy to do, and people forget to exclude the segments they do not own from matches.
Ryan, may I ask why matches occur where the fingerprint sample has no resemblance whatever to the "matched content", if this system is so accurate? Also may I ask why there are so many discrepancies in timing on the matches? I've seen anything from match attempts of only 2 seconds, to one of over half an hour.

At this moment, I have a dispute lodged for a no resemblance "match", and this isn't the first time it has happened.
 

RyanH

Loving YTtalk
Joined
Nov 27, 2015
Messages
262
Reaction score
82
Ryan, may I ask why matches occur where the fingerprint sample has no resemblance whatever to the "matched content", if this system is so accurate? Also may I ask why there are so many discrepancies in timing on the matches? I've seen anything from match attempts of only 2 seconds, to one of over half an hour.

At this moment, I have a dispute lodged for a no resemblance "match", and this isn't the first time it has happened.
It's most likely because the Content ID user incorrectly titled the asset, it does happen, especially when record labels upload millions of songs in bulk (most of the time it's automated)

If you link me the video you're having a problem with, I can have a look at the asset inside Content ID and hopefully help you.
 

UKHypnotist

I Love YTtalk
Joined
Nov 25, 2012
Messages
1,710
Reaction score
684
Age
63
Location
Market Harborough, Leicestershire, England
Channel Type
Musician
Can't link here as don't have VIP at the moment. Can tell you both video title and song CID says it matched and you can see for yourself there is no resemblance. I am a Sound Designer and RF Library artist in my own right and I don't use other people's music without a license. The soundtrack to the video in question is my own composition.

Video Title: "Meditative Drone With Crystal Bowl and Binaural Beat"

Matched Content: "Silent Kill Megatrax" match is supposedly from 9:53 - 14:21

You just go up to Megatrax, play Silent Kill, and tell me if you hear a match for Silent Kill to my 34:08 runtime soundscape composition at that point in the video! And if it is a different asset, please tell me where to find same on the WWW, as if there is a match it will be simply similar sounding material rather than an exact match.

Also please tell me how to view an asset within Content ID as that will be a valuable weapon in and of itself.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
TubeBuddy Easy to use and install.