Fullscreen or YouTube?

Galvin Lee

Galvin Lee

The Unique Guitarist
So, two days ago I was with a MCN called Freedom! and I found out that they weren't helpful dealing with copyrights and I requested to unlink right away. I'm a musician. I play the ukulele, guitar and also the cajons. That means I make covers too, but today when I uploaded a cover of Sam Smith's I'm Not The Only One(Cajon Cover), my audio got muted, and Freedom! never helped me. Only then I found out they don't have permission for their partners(like me) to use these songs and I'm gonna cover lots of songs from a lot of different record labels. The song was copyrighted under Universal Music Group, which I also found out that another MCN, Fullscreen has permission to it. So, my question is, when I get out of Freedom!, should I continue to be a YouTube partner or apply for a Fullscreen partnership? I see that ALL the drummers on YouTube are monetized and partnered to YouTube, so which one should I choose?
 
You should probably ask Fullscreen's support about it, just to clarify things. I'm not a musician so I don't know too much about it.
 
Problem doesn't lie on Fullscreen but Freedom! and now I'm pulling out of the partnership. What I'm asking for advise is actually Fullscreen or YouTube should I partner with?
 
youtube itself wont offer any support when it comes to copyright, you would need to be in a network that does support uploading copyrited materials. You should contact fullscreen and ask them if they would be able to help you out if you where to join them
 
Many famous musician YouTubers actually don't join MCNs, but only partner with the YouTube Partnership Program. They don't get copyright issues too and their drum covers are up live, so would it be beneficial for me to stick with the YouTube Partnership Program?
 
Lets get one thing straight; MCN's pretty much never have some magical 'permission' that suddenly allows you to use content that is otherwise protected by copyright. Whether or not covers should be flagged in the first place is a different matter. But joining a network (or YouTube for that matter) will NOT allow you to circumvent the copyright flagging system.

In other words, if a network tells you straight up that "you are allowed to use any material copyrighted by Sam Smith (or any other artists they claim) without issues", they are lying to you because that is NOT how things work. Ever. For anyone. Logically it CAN'T work like that. They would have to pay the artists in question insane amounts of money for a blanket permission like that. It just doesn't happen.

With that out of the way, covers should be a form of fair use and thus should not get muted or otherwise claimed. Unfortunately the content ID system isn't so smart that it can tell a cover from the original (especially if you play it well). That is not a problem with the network you joined, it's not something they can ever prevent from happening. What you should do if this happens is contest the claim and explain that the video in question is a cover performed completely by you, not the original artist or the original song. In theory this should then solve itself, though in practice covers tend to be somewhat of a grey area when it comes to legality. Music labels love to throw copyright b******t at cover artists, claiming it infringes on copyright etc, even though it's not quite that simple in reality.
 
So it's okay if I post a cover song then contest it for Fair Use? But, if you were to choose between YouTube and Fullscreen(or any MCN made for a musician) which would you choose to better benefit you? Thanks for your useful reply though.
 
The Galvin Lee said:
So it's okay if I post a cover song then contest it for Fair Use? But, if you were to choose between YouTube and Fullscreen(or any MCN made for a musician) which would you choose to better benefit you? Thanks for your useful reply though.
Click to expand...

In a perfect world it should be okay. In the real world, large music labels tend to get their way on more than one occasion. Try to contest it, it's the only thing you can realistically do.

If by 'YouTube' you mean using Adsense, then I would always go with a network for a variety of reasons. Just make sure the network has favorable conditions. Don't let yourself be locked in for more than a month and don't accept anything less than 90% is what I would recommend.
 
TigerXtrm said:
Don't let yourself be locked in for more than a month and don't accept anything less than 90% is what I would recommend.
Click to expand...
Good luck getting that in Fullscreen lol. They will probably offer him a 70/30 2 year contract.

If you can monetize your videos fine with adsense, then stick with adsense. If you are certain being in Fullscreen will allow you to monetize what you couldn't before, then join Fullscreen. Having said that, you're going to be stuck in Fullscreen for a long time if you join. Make sure their Universal Music Group deals will actually work for you.
 
A few questions here so far.
1. Fair Use - If I were to make a cover song of Uptown Funk or Glory, will I be able to contest the copyright claim with fair use and what is the message I should contest with?

2. Monetization - If I were to upload a cover song of a famous artist, will I be able to monetize that video no matter on AdSense or Fullscreen?

3. Benefits - Can someone compare the benefits sticking with the YouTube Partnership Program(AdSense) rather than Fullscreen

4. Freedom! has replied to my email and they have gave me quite a good email as the answer to my question. Should I still unlink to them as I see no benefits sticking with them?

5. Musicians - A lot of drummers who cover their drum track along with the ORIGINAL SONG actually uploaded it with no claims and they were monetizing it. So did they get the actual permission for this or was it a Fair Use contest?

THANKS FOR ANSWERING MY STUPID QUESTIONS GUYS! NEED LOTS OF HELP AS I'M ACTUALLY USING CONTENT THAT I DON'T OWN!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top