VPX Soundtrack Maker Relaxed (Easy Listening) YT copyright claim

browj2 wrote on 4/3/2020, 5:12 PM

I have a copyright claim on a video that I posted to YouTube for a part of a SoundTrack Maker song using Relaxed (Easy Listening) with the Jazzy emotion. Interestingly, there was no hit on the other emotions that I used. The supposed copyright song is "Baby Sweet Star" by the Fonkmasters. I was unable to find it on YouTube to listen to it. It seems to be on Spotify, but again, I could not listen to it.

I am disputing the claim.

I had another one recently for using one of the versions of "We wish you a Merry Christmas" that I purchased on Catooh, with the claim that it was a song by Glen Campbell called "Southern Nights," not even close to "We wish you a Merry Christmas." The claim has since been removed.

I'm curious to know if others have received copyright claims for using music from Magix and whether or not you disputed them.

John CB

Comments

CubeAce wrote on 4/4/2020, 2:49 AM

@browj2

High John.

Yes but I used the track on two separate videos and only got a claim on one. My channel isn't monetised and I hadn't bothered to challenge. The track is called RINGS OF SATURN and the claim was from Maxvibe. It's on an unlisted video so limited viewing anyway. I don't think that is what the track is called in Magix though. I will check.

This is the video.

Ray.

browj2 wrote on 4/4/2020, 9:02 AM

Hi Ray,

Just because I have shares in a pot company doesn't mean that I'm "high." In fact, come Monday, it will mean that I'm low (share price will likely drop) because the Ontario government has declared the retailers non-essential and they have to shut down for a couple of weeks. Quebec has declared its liquor stores essential, but just in case, I stocked up on wine to see us through the crisis.

Good video!

I didn't dispute claims on one video but should have, just out of principle. Unfortunately, disputing does nothing to get YT (Google) to improve their algorithm.

John CB

CubeAce wrote on 4/4/2020, 9:22 AM

@browj2

I have another YouTuber (Look up David Harry on YouTube) I know who has had copyright claims against his own published copyrighted material from the publisher he limited licensed it to. YouTube has taken no notice and will not remove the copyright strike. It's all automated and presently there are not enough YouTube staff to deal with complaints. Even then it's unlikely they will go up against the major copyright holders. This is why I've started to make my own music backing tracks.

johnebaker wrote on 4/4/2020, 5:11 PM

@browj2, @CubeAce

. . . . It's all automated and presently there are not enough YouTube staff to deal with complaints . . . .

Have you looked at the free YT audio library - plenty of music there for your videos.

John EB

browj2 wrote on 4/4/2020, 10:33 PM

@johnebaker

Hi John,

No, I haven't. Too many people have access to it, less with Magix music. I'll take a look.

We should not be getting copyright hits on music from Magix that is not even close to the one matched up by YT. Sounds like a conspiracy to get us to use YT music, no?

John CB

CubeAce wrote on 4/5/2020, 5:38 AM

@browj2

@johnebaker

I don't think it's that. Sometimes an artist will release a similar version of a song and re-title it and then sell the rights to a music publishing company under limited license or the other way around. The problem can be when the limited license runs out the music publishers often don't redact the claim or it's not deleted from the copyright list. YouTube will uphold the rights of the person / company with the most clout to sue them.

I have looked at the libraries. My problem with them is it takes longer to find something I have in mind in my head than to do it myself. My tracks may not be polished or even to anyone else's liking but at least they do me and only take a few hours to put together. I have a lot of sequencers so I can cheat. 😆

Ray.

johnebaker wrote on 4/5/2020, 7:45 AM

@browj2

Hi John

. . . . . We should not be getting copyright hits on music from Magix that is not even close to the one matched up by YT. . . . .

Yes we should, however the ones that I know of have been hit by minor entities or individuals, some of whom apper to be trying to make a few bucks. Over the years we have had no claims, that I know of, from major music entities.

@CubeAce

. . . . Sometimes an artist will release a similar version of a song and re-title it and then sell the rights to a music publishing company under limited license or the other way around . . . .

The problem that has occurred a few times in the forum over the years is where, users creating music, using Music Maker, Sequoia, Music Studio etc, have been hit by copyright claims form other users of Magix software who have used the same Soundpools or sections/parts of Soundpools.

In this situation the claimant is in error - the Soundpools cannot be copyrighted by the person creating the music, they are copyright Magix. The users only have a license, commercial we hope, to use the Soundpools or sections/parts.

John EB

CubeAce wrote on 4/5/2020, 8:11 AM

@johnebaker

Hi John.

I didn't mean the other way around in that sense. I meant music publishers that have limited copyright permissions often don't redact the copyright after the contract expires. Sometimes copyright is only on one version or mix of a composition but the logarithms used often pick out the wrong version. Sometimes things get through as well. Winter Wonderland on my project should get a copyright claim on YouTube but didn't because the automated system didn't recognise it, but a tune played by the Royal Marines band on another of my videos was.

It's very hit and miss. One way around is just to take the video down and replace the soundtrack. I've done that twice in the past but I realised that a copyright strike isn't always a problem. You just can't monetize that video and you may have to put somewhere in the written info accreditation citations.

Ray.

browj2 wrote on 4/20/2020, 6:48 PM

I got another copyright hit, this time for "Jingle Bells" that I purchased from Catooh in 2013. The file size is 1949kB, length 1:29, ogg file. Document number: 1504131955040493cat

The first part is instrumental and then there is a tenor singing in the last part.

Does anyone else happen to have this version from Magix?

The claims are from:

James Last and His Orchestra - Medley White Christmas/Midnight in December/Jingle Bells
The Golden Tenors - Jingle Bells

I listened to them and the Jingle Bells version that I purchased is definitely made up of the two songs - one segues into the other. This would mean that Magix sold music that someone put together and did not have the copyright to do so, or they did and I have a license to use it.

Before I complain to Magix, I would like to know if others have had a similar problem with music from Magix.

Thanks,

John CB

CubeAce wrote on 4/20/2020, 8:27 PM

Hi John.

As I said earlier, there is weird stuff going on at YouTube at the moment. It's broken. One YouTuber has now had a copyright claim against his own voice.

Ray.

browj2 wrote on 4/20/2020, 11:53 PM

@CubeAce

Hi Ray,

In this particular, it seems that something weird went on with Magix Catooh rather than YT.

John CB

johnebaker wrote on 4/21/2020, 1:49 AM

@browj2

Hi John

. . . . "Jingle Bells" that I purchased from Catooh in 2013 . . . . Magix sold music that someone put together . . . .

IIRC that was one of the capabilities of Catooh, users could create their own Soundloops, Effects, etc and upload them to Catooh and sell them.

The T&C agreements required the person uploading to Catooh to confirm that, in this case a Soundloop, was their own work/creation and they were liable for any come back.

HTH

John EB