Monetising movie review videos - copyright claims.

[Trist]

Hello!

I have had a few copyright claims which just say I can't monetise a video. Which is fair enough. However I am just showing the clips as part of a review and I would have thought this falls under fair use since it's such a small portion of the video and there for review purposes.

Is there a max length of clip before the auto-system tags it as copyright claimed? I would like to include small clips under fair use, but moving forward I will need to monetise things in order to be able to afford to keep making videos so it would be great to understand if there is a length of clip which is small enough to not get auto-tagged or if that just isn't how it works.

(Note; Clips used in my videos are normally without the sound and with my own commentary over the top, but sometimes it's nice to include a short segment with the sound in the intro to the video for example, and I always take these from trailers so they don't give away any spoilers or use any footage the movie companies might not want broadcast).

Any tips guys? ^_^ Thanks!

 

[UKHypnotist]

I have no idea about the length; you may be able to dispute on the Fair Use ticket, but the copyright owner can always reject such a dispute. Do be careful; if such claimed movie reviews come to constitute the majority of your content, you could conceivably be disqualified from the monetization program.

From YouTube's Partner Program Policies:

"t’s important that you have the right to use all of your content commercially before monetising it on YouTube. Please familiarise yourself with the Monetisation Basics & Policies. Repeated submission of ineligible videos and/or insufficient documentation may affect your ability to monetise videos in the future."

Form the stated Monetisation Basics & Policies:

"You must meet these minimum requirements in order to monetise your videos:

• Your content is advertiser-friendly.
• You created the content or have permission to use it commercially.
• You are able to provide documentation proving that you own commercial rights to all audio and video content."

And under Examples of content that would NOT be eligible for monetisation

"You edit together a compilation of content created by others."

It's my thought that you are being denied monetisation on those movie reviews due to their containing content from major film studios, without any evidence of commercial use rights. If you use more than one clip per review, it might be seen as that dreaded "compilation of content created by others" even though you are doing a review. You aren't the first YouTube creator to run into this issue either.

 

[Trist]

It's frustrating as they gave me screener access to preview the content specifically for review and invited me to the London press event so I would cover it... then are penalising me for reviewing it... I think it's just because it's all automatic. The clip with audio is a small percentage of my video overall and the video isn't a compilation of other people work; It's a video mostly of me talking with small clips mostly without the audio or just stills with my audio over it to illustrate particular points. Definately fair use. I just used a small section at the start to lead into it - I wondered if that was just too long or if you just can't do that at all...

Would you recommend just never using any clips with audio of any length?

 

[UKHypnotist]

It's frustrating as they gave me screener access to preview the content specifically for review and invited me to the London press event so I would cover it... then are penalising me for reviewing it... I think it's just because it's all automatic. The clip with audio is a small percentage of my video overall and the video isn't a compilation of other people work; It's a video mostly of me talking with small clips mostly without the audio or just stills with my audio over it to illustrate particular points. Definately fair use. I just used a small section at the start to lead into it - I wondered if that was just too long or if you just can't do that at all...

Would you recommend just never using any clips with audio of any length?

I'd actually recommend either reaching out to the claimant (If it is the entity who invited you), reminding them of your invited association with them and politely asking them to remove the claim, or disputing under fair use. Clips with audio are always a problem due to the copyright holder of the audio and the copyright holder of the video being two different entities. Yes I would in future mute any in-clip audio.

I might also in your place, consider posting a different type of content to YouTube; a content type which wouldn't be quite so problematic. You are a fairly young channel from your size; jepoardising your YT career so early is never a good thing. It only takes one channel ban to kill a YouTube Creator altogether.

Hope this helps!

 

[Trist]

I will avoid the audio - I don't normally use it but they did give me the invite to review it before it was broadcast so thought it was ok!

Reviews are not all of my content; but talking about film, games and comics is and will want to contain a certain small amount of clips for reference to help illustrate the points made, so I can't change content without abandoning my topic - and I am not really qualified in anything else! Film and media studies was my entire academic career and I only joined Youtube to make this sort of content. I will avoid audio even when invited to review things in future - hopefully that will help. Plus I will go back to the more 'screen in screen' approach more, as that should help as well

Thanks for your advice and help! ^_^

 

[UKHypnotist]

You're very welcome!

If you plan to keep monetising, consider creating a template for a standard email you can send to rights holders requesting commercial rights in the material you plan to review. Remember, YouTube admin can call for your commercial rights evidence documentation in the individual elements of any video you post; I myself got that on a video on one of my secondary channels.

In spite of the fact I had all the needed documentation, stated this and invited YouTube admin to give me an email address or even a physical address to which I could submit same, the video in question remained unmonetised for over 14 months before monetisation was restored; losing me revenue for every day the situation persisted.

The video in question was and remains one of the most popular items on that particular channel.