Will I be approved?

[Dave Pollack]

Hey everyone!

Loving reading all of the information on this site- it's really helping me out a ton. I do have a question about my channel though-

I'm getting close to being able to apply for monetization (have over 1k subs, close to 4k hours) but have 2 videos that I'm wondering about that both involve containing copyright material. The first says this-

You can monetize this video.

Copyrighted content was found in your video.

The claimant is allowing their content to be used in your YouTube video. You might also be able to monetize your video by sharing revenue with the claimant.

The second says this-

Ads might appear on your video.

Copyrighted content was found in your video.

The claimant is allowing their content to be used in your YouTube video. However, ads might appear on it.


I don't have any copyright or community guidelines strikes, but I'm wondering if these 2 videos will be an issue when applying for monetization. They both say "If you agree with these conditions, you don't have to do anything," but do you think these videos will cause an issue (maybe with "duplication"?) when applying?

Let me know what you think, and thanks in advance!

 

[UhoohExtra]

I'd make sure it was squeaky clean and delete those ones especially if they don't too many views. You could always redit them learning from the first time and upload something better dsigned for watchtime retention or call to action. And getting rid of any bits that might cause IP claims.

 

[UKHypnotist]

Active claims are just as bad as active strikes if you are looking for a successful compliance review. Also if you haven't gotten worldwide broadcast and commercial usage rights for every song you play on your channel, and don't have the documentation to prove it to YouTube, it doesn't really matter that you are doing tutorials.

You will be rejected for monetization unless you can provide the above. Please Google "YouTube Partner Program Policies".

 

[Dave Pollack]

Thanks for the response! The issues are not with any of my tutorial videos, just 2 covers I did. I will delete those videos so there are no claims at all on the channel. I appreciate the info!

Active claims are just as bad as active strikes if you are looking for a successful compliance review. Also if you haven't gotten worldwide broadcast and commercial usage rights for every song you play on your channel, and don't have the documentation to prove it to YouTube, it doesn't really matter that you are doing tutorials.

You will be rejected for monetization unless you can provide the above. Please Google "YouTube Partner Program Policies".

 

[UKHypnotist]

Thanks for the response! The issues are not with any of my tutorial videos, just 2 covers I did. I will delete those videos so there are no claims at all on the channel. I appreciate the info!

I'm afraid you don't understand, Dave.

What I've stated is a part of the YouTube Partner Programme Policy set; and if you fail to follow what I've said, you will be rejected. Just because you have no further claims, doesn't mean that when your time comes for review, YouTube will not find issues with your channel.

Here: I'll get you the relevant article segment. I'm going away on Tuesday; so I'm not going to waste my points to activate VIP.

"Repeated submission of ineligible videos and/or insufficient documentation may affect your ability to monetise videos in the future.

Here are some of the key monetisation policies to be aware of. Please make sure that you also read the policies thoroughly

• Own commercial-use rights: Make sure that you have all of the rights to the content submitted for monetisation, including all audio and video elements.

• Understand your rights: In case of incorporating third-party content in your video submitted for monetisation, make sure that you understand your rights granted by the licence."

Just three weeks ago, a former BBC Worldwide and Sky TV producer, who had also done content for such entities as the Military History and Discovery Channels found his own channel which presented that content denied monetization on the grounds of Duplication.

If this can happen to such a high-profile professional, on broadcast content he himself produced, it can certainly happen to you.

 

[Dave Pollack]

I'm afraid you don't understand, Dave.

What I've stated is a part of the YouTube Partner Programme Policy set; and if you fail to follow what I've said, you will be rejected. Just because you have no further claims, doesn't mean that when your time comes for review, YouTube will not find issues with your channel.

Here: I'll get you the relevant article segment. I'm going away on Tuesday; so I'm not going to waste my points to activate VIP.

"Repeated submission of ineligible videos and/or insufficient documentation may affect your ability to monetise videos in the future.

Here are some of the key monetisation policies to be aware of. Please make sure that you also read the policies thoroughly

• Own commercial-use rights: Make sure that you have all of the rights to the content submitted for monetisation, including all audio and video elements.

• Understand your rights: In case of incorporating third-party content in your video submitted for monetisation, make sure that you understand your rights granted by the licence."

Just three weeks ago, a former BBC Worldwide and Sky TV producer, who had also done content for such entities as the Military History and Discovery Channels found his own channel which presented that content denied monetization on the grounds of Duplication.

If this can happen to such a high-profile professional, on broadcast content he himself produced, it can certainly happen to you.

I deleted all the videos (2) with the copyright claims. I was just commenting on the fact you said they don’t care if they’re tuturial videos, and I agree- I was just saying the 2 videos with the copyrigh claims were other videos. They have been deleted and there are no claims on my channel now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[UKHypnotist]

Sigh...

I will be here when you eventually post the results of your compliance review; it looks as though you won't believe it until it actually happens. So I will say no more on the matter, except this...

You took the statement I did about the tutorials out of context: what I was saying is it would not matter if they were tutorials...if the commercial music songs being taught have no commercial use licensing attached, they will cause your monetization review to fail.

I won't be back to this forum till after September 30th; good luck till then!

 

[Dave Pollack]

I won't be back to this forum till after September 30th; good luck till then!

Hit the threshold of 1k subs/4k watch hours on October 15th.

Just got the email today, November 20th, that I'm approved for the YouTube Partner Program.

There is hope people! I thought I was going to have to wait until the end of the year, but I got a nice surprise today.

 

[OldManTenno]

Hit the threshold of 1k subs/4k watch hours on October 15th.

Just got the email today, November 20th, that I'm approved for the YouTube Partner Program.

There is hope people! I thought I was going to have to wait until the end of the year, but I got a nice surprise today.

Congrats dude!

 

[UKHypnotist]

Congrats indeed!

Now all we have to worry about is the looming of the upccoming EU-CD (EU Copyright Directive.)