Lickd copyright claim free easy license option

[offbeatbryce]

Hello,

Thought I'd post this. Lickd which is a new company has just partnered with UMG Universal Music Group to allow Youtubers, Instagramers etc to license Master Recordings Copyright Claim free to upload online at a very reasonable price to start off with. First song is free and the price is calculated on average views on YouTube etc. For me it's about 80 dollars a track and goes up from there. You only have to pay once for a life time for the video and you can license the song for a video for multiple platforms per video. They currently have Boys 2 men, Joey Ramone etc. Pretty dang cool. More artists coming soon. I've been talking to the support staff.

go to lickd.co Scroll down for just added songs or browse the library. They have alternate versions of Lady Gaga etc performed by other singers as well. It's the first Mainstream Copyright Claim free license option for the internet. I asked support and was told videos can be use for lip sync, dance videos and pretty much anything except for remixes. I was told Covers might be okay depending on what the deals YouTube had and Lickd support can provide input on that as well.

 

[offbeatbryce]

I’m shocked no one has replied to this

 

[The NotARubicon!]

Do you know what their process is for when (not IF, but WHEN) you get a ContentID match?

EDIT: Nevermind, I see they integrate directly with Youtube.. AudioBlocks start started doing this also,its pretty slick.. I'm going to check this out!

 

[Tito Tims Videos]

For $80 a song - I will stick with YT music

 

[UKHypnotist]

Also, licensing is largely irrelevant in today's monetization climate. People who are willing to pay large sums of money in order to license commercial music are likely to be disappointed when applying for monetization: and We Are The Hits recently updated its content requirements to exclude any videos which include original commercial or master recordings from monetizability by that MCN.

https://wearethehits.com/

"Reused content

Reused content refers to channels that repurpose someone else's content without adding significant original commentary or educational value. This policy is taken from the AdSense Search Console portion of AdSense program policies. We’ve put it in a context that’s more relevant for YouTube creators.

This policy applies to your channel as a whole. In other words, if you have many videos that violate our guidelines, monetization may be removed from your entire channel.

What is allowed to monetize
The spirit of this policy is to make sure we’re monetizing original content that adds value to viewers. If you put a funny or thoughtful spin on content you didn’t originally create, you’ve transformed the content in some way. It’s generally OK to have this type of content on your channel, but individual videos may be subject to other policies like copyright. In other words, we allow reused content if viewers can tell that there’s a meaningful difference between the original video and your video.

Note: While these examples do not violate the reused content monetization policy, other policies, such as copyright, still apply.

Examples of what’s allowed to monetize (including but not limited to):

• Using clips for a critical review
• A scene from a movie where you’ve rewritten the dialog and changed the voiceover
• Replays of a sports tournament where you explain the special moves a competitor did to succeed (or fail)
• Reaction videos where you comment on the original video
• Edited footage from other creators where you add a storyline or commentary

Content that violates this guideline
Taking someone else’s content, making minimal changes, and calling it your own original work would be a violation of this guideline. This policy applies even if you have permission from the original creator. Reused content is separate from YouTube’s Copyright enforcement, which means it’s not based on copyright, permission, or fair use. This guideline means sometimes, you may not get claims against your content, but your channel may still violate our reused content guidelines.

More examples of what’s not allowed to monetize (this list is not exhaustive):

• Clips of moments from your favorite show edited together with little or no narrative
• Short videos you compiled from other social media websites
• Collections of songs from different artists (even if you have their permission)
• Content uploaded many times by other creators
• Promotion of other people’s content (even if you have permission)"

From the YouTube Channel Monetization Policies...

YouTube channel monetization policies - YouTube Help

When you use music generated by Dream Track in a long-form video

support.google.com

 

[offbeatbryce]

Also, licensing is largely irrelevant in today's monetization climate. People who are willing to pay large sums of money in order to license commercial music are likely to be disappointed when applying for monetization: and We Are The Hits recently updated its content requirements to exclude any videos which include original commercial or master recordings from monetizability by that MCN.

https://wearethehits.com/

"Reused content

Reused content refers to channels that repurpose someone else's content without adding significant original commentary or educational value. This policy is taken from the AdSense Search Console portion of AdSense program policies. We’ve put it in a context that’s more relevant for YouTube creators.

This policy applies to your channel as a whole. In other words, if you have many videos that violate our guidelines, monetization may be removed from your entire channel.

What is allowed to monetize
The spirit of this policy is to make sure we’re monetizing original content that adds value to viewers. If you put a funny or thoughtful spin on content you didn’t originally create, you’ve transformed the content in some way. It’s generally OK to have this type of content on your channel, but individual videos may be subject to other policies like copyright. In other words, we allow reused content if viewers can tell that there’s a meaningful difference between the original video and your video.

Note: While these examples do not violate the reused content monetization policy, other policies, such as copyright, still apply.

Examples of what’s allowed to monetize (including but not limited to):

• Using clips for a critical review
• A scene from a movie where you’ve rewritten the dialog and changed the voiceover
• Replays of a sports tournament where you explain the special moves a competitor did to succeed (or fail)
• Reaction videos where you comment on the original video
• Edited footage from other creators where you add a storyline or commentary

Content that violates this guideline
Taking someone else’s content, making minimal changes, and calling it your own original work would be a violation of this guideline. This policy applies even if you have permission from the original creator. Reused content is separate from YouTube’s Copyright enforcement, which means it’s not based on copyright, permission, or fair use. This guideline means sometimes, you may not get claims against your content, but your channel may still violate our reused content guidelines.

More examples of what’s not allowed to monetize (this list is not exhaustive):

• Clips of moments from your favorite show edited together with little or no narrative
• Short videos you compiled from other social media websites
• Collections of songs from different artists (even if you have their permission)
• Content uploaded many times by other creators
• Promotion of other people’s content (even if you have permission)"

From the YouTube Channel Monetization Policies...

YouTube channel monetization policies - YouTube Help

When you use music generated by Dream Track in a long-form video

support.google.com

how is it irrelevant? It's relevant if one wants to monetize the video. Also, we are the hits has had that policy from day one. I've been with them since 2017. I'm also confused what this has to do with lickd? YouTube's policy has nothing to do with lickd. Also YouTube must not be paying attention because I bought a song from Lickd and they removed the claim within 4 hours and not once has anything happened.

Furthermore YouTube itself says that Content ID claims normally no affect on YouTube Partnership and that the reused content is separate from Copyright.

If I have zero Copyright strikes or Content ID claims, how can I be removed for Reused Content?
This “Reused Content” guideline is not about Copyright (or permission, or fair use, etc) and is separate from YouTube’s Copyright enforcement – it’s part of the Content Quality section of YPP policies. If you’re using copyrighted material but adding your own unique value, you may be eligible for the YouTube Partner Program. If you have a Content ID claim, you may still be eligible for YPP if your channel provides unique value in your videos. And even if you have no Content ID claims, you may be ineligible for YPP if your videos do not provide unique value. Note: If you’re thinking of using someone else’s copyrighted material in your video, make sure you learn more about Copyright law!


Basically this means you have to be unique to be accepted. I've said this many times. I've never been removed from YouTube and I'm following what all the publishers are telling me along with the copyright owners and everything has been fine. Not trying to start an argument or anything like that but it's just interesting to me that I've been talking to the owners of content and been fine while others who don't do this haven't been.

 

[UKHypnotist]

Bryce, Bryce...

It's irrelevant because the licensed media is not the original creation of the channel owner, and unless massive original content value is added, YouTube will not monetize it. Very little video content based on licensed material if that material comprises the majority of the video will be approved to monetize.

Furthermore YouTube itself says that Content ID claims normally no affect on YouTube Partnership and that the reused content is separate from Copyright.

I am sorry, but you have totally misinterpreted the content which appears under this statement in your reply.

Content ID claims do have an effect on partnership these days. Otherwise we wouldn't be seeing existing partner channels who have lots of claims being removed from the YPP, or new applicant channels with lots of claims being rejected for monetization. Remember that paragraph says you may be eligible; not that you definitely will be eligible.

I know you've never been removed from the YPP; and I can tell you why.

WATH has apparently not been asked yet to enforce the affiliate channel rule which states that all MCN channels which are at affiliate status must have direct partnership through YouTube before being onboarded as an MCN member. This may have been overlooked due to WATH's close association with the FREEDOM! network.

When YouTube finally does this, you know what will happen. You've never met the application thresholds; so you will be delinked at that point and asked to build your channel to the application thresholds and apply directly to the YouTube Partner Program.

It takes both uniqueness and originality to be approved to monetize these days.