I mean... what is this all about?
 
I only have seven videos up on my channel, and the latest one I uploaded, when I wend to view it, had an advert on it, and not a very nice one either (Dope Factory).
 
The video was all my own work, using my video footage and music.
 
Is it an automatic thing? Does anyone know how it works?
 
 
Beats me... I have disputed the claim.

Is this about the advert or is that a separate annoyance? As in there is some random ad (which is unfortunately how the new and "improved" GoogleTube seems to be rolling) AND there are some clowns trying to claim your vid is their copyrighted work?
 
If it's the latter you may have stumbled into one of those annoying patent/copyright troll situations. Essentially clownphucks who who screw around with the intellectual property laws to screw over little guys who don't ahve the means to fight back.
 
Essentially more deets required... HOWEVER since this is a legal matter and this is a public forum you may want to not discuss it too much (or at least use vague terms and leave names out... so edit your OP to remove their name because that might even incur some slander nonsense). This gets into law talking guy territory.
 
In the interest of getting this info to you quickly I will post this and continue in another post.
 
Cheers.

Actually for communication use terms like the claimant "Party X". Also you may want to avoid posting a link to the actual vids as well (which will obviously identify the specific content disputed thus making it obvious what/who you are posting about).
 
If you used the same handle you use here for your YT account or there are other really obvious ways to link this discussion to your handle then that could be an issue as well.
 
Just trying to minimize damage.
 
I am not a lawyer and I am not YOUR lawyer (which is standard disclosure for such discussions... you obviously already know that though... I ain't that SMRT... lulz).
 

Thanks Beeps... I've edited the OP as you suggested...
 
I reckon it can only be an automatic thing because the dispute was raised as soon as I published it.
 
They have 30 days to respond, so it will be interesting to see how this pans out...
 
edit: link removed
 

Beepster
Also you may want to avoid posting a link to the actual vids as well 

haha! I've just deleted the vid link...
 
thanks again dood... I'm not used to this kind of stuff LOL

Hi,
 
I think Youtube and others are getting hammered on the copyright edge because a lot of stuff in there is not legal in the proper sense of the word. I think, but can not substantiate that a lot of the threats are just junk mail, but it's possible that there are legal things in the midst. Movie studios are known for spamming you with the copyright notices, for example.
 
What bothers me, is when someone does something on their own, and it would be considered original, and they decline it. That suggests that their checking method is faulty and inaccurate, and (personally) I do not recommend using it, as I still think (possibly erroneously) that your own website is a much better way to go, although a lot more work!
 
But you retain your own control, which I think is better.
 
While I appreciate YT and its proliferation, it has helped music tremendously, their concerns are a joke, since the real artist would rarely, if ever, post their own music. I can see it now ... Mick logs into his computer, YT and then posts his latest!
 
Right!

Okay... now that the boring paranoia stuff is out of the way.
 
Since you are in the UK your material falls under the fancy automagic copyright laws most western countries have agreed to. Those essentially state as soon as you put something you have created into some form of physical format you automatically own the copyright to it.
 
So if you think of an original poem or melody as soon as you write it down on paper it is automatically copyrighted and you own all rights to it.... technically.
 
In the digital age this translate to digital media as well like hard drives, writeable discs, uploading to a website, etc.
 
While this is the case it is easily manipulated by nefarious neer do wells. Essentially you have to PROVE in court that YOU are the original creator.
 
This is why  people used to say "mail yourself a copy and don't open it". That way there is a postmark. That's old school and isn't the best way to do it but it's still pretty good any judge that isn't totally corrupt will see that as convincing evidence that someone is trying to screw you... unless of course it turns into an "I already wrote that melody BEFORE this guy did" and they can prove it using the same types of methods.
 
This is why people shell out money to actually pay to copyright stuff through their government bureaucracies. This is not very practical though because here in Canada it's $60 freaking dollars to copyright a single work. Even then it can still be disputed but if you get the copyright that ends up looking better in court (and it makes it easier for the lawyers/judges to sort out).
 
What I've been trying to do myself, since I don't want to pay $60 every time I fart into a microphone, is use "burden of proof" type methods. Things like burning files to disc with the original file timestamps (so when you open it you can see the date the file was created). I signed up for SOCAN which is (one of) the royalty collection agency in Canada who don't deal with copyright but you can register your songs with them for royalty collection which of course provides some proof of when the material was created (well when it was registered anyway). Sites like soundcloud or other uploaders will put a time stamp on when the file was first uploaded. Linking to it on a forum like this adds to prove a date of when you produced the material too.
 
So, if it comes down to it, you just bury the court with all this and if the aggressors claim is thin then, again if the judge isn't corrupt, you should be able to shut it down.
 
HOWEVER, if the other party has proof that PRECEDES your proof (which is impossible if the dispute is indeed over something you created) you may be out of luck.
 
Where it gets murky are these intellectual property trolls who patent/copyright things in such vague ways that it covers the scope of all sorts of things people are LIKELY to put out. Then they strike. Usually what happens is they'll issue some kind of letter/warning demanding compensation to avoid a lawsuit.
 
So it's basically a type of extortion. You don't want to have to pay lawyers and go to court to fight something worth far less than the lawyers costs and the "trolls" make sure their monetary demands are less than what it would cost you to go to court as well. If it DOES go to court and you win (which is likely) you are still out time and money.
 
Thing is these people don't care whether they win or lose or if you even pay attention to them. They just put this crap out there and if one out of ten people get freaked out enough to pay out then their bullpizz is worth it. They are scum, it is a racket and most sickening of all it is perfectly legal.
 
Not saying that is what is happening here BUT if that's what's up do some research on this behavior. People have been pushing back against these scummos more and more which is really what is needed to change things.
 
Again... I am not a lawyer and I am not YOUR lawyer. If this turns into a big thing you really should contact an attorney that specializes in copyright law or simply call your local copyright/patent offic over there in the UK. They can tell you everything you need to know.
 
Cheeeeers... and don't let me make you paranoid. Just want you to be armed with knowledge. Most powerful weapon in this age.

Now that I've made you sufficiently parnoid (sorry... lol) this is probably just some kind of confusion on youtube's part.
 
You said it was instant so maybe it's just some wording or song title or something in play and youtube is being overly cautious and have filters set up to snag such things. Like maybe your song title is identical to something "Party X" went through the bother of officially copyrighting so youtube's all seeing eye flagged it as if you were uploading a pirated version of it. Meanwhile it's an original work that just happens to have the same title (which is not against the law or actionable AFAIK).
 
As Moshie pointed out YT got a LOT of grief over copyright stuff so they've upped their game and I can only imagine now with Google's lawyers behind things (and Google's insane indexing programming weirdness) that it's only gotten more refined/strict.
 
Really you disputed it. They'll probably get a real human involved to check it out and all will be well. Do NOT contact "Party X" though just in case they are skeevy fudgemonkeys out to screw you. As soon as you make direct contact it kind of opens the floodgates to more harassment and litigeous bullpuckey.
 
All will be well I'm sure.
 
Cheers.

Hi,
 
There are some funny things ... for example, I was a part of the Ygdrasil Journal of Poetic Arts, for the what I thought was about 5 to 7 years, that is now on something like its 20th year (can't even count that far!!!), and is listed in the National Library of Canada, and I'm not aware that Klaus is paying anything for it. The notice on the magazine states that the copyright is to revert to the writer, but that it was printed with the writer's permission.
 
They have never, to my knowledge, bothered us about it. And it has been for this whole time, about new poetry and poems and folks, which in my book might just be a great big secret here. In fact, I did a couple of issues with my own dad's poetry, and he is famous and published and all that, and I translated a couple of his own works, and no one has ever said anything about it. Maybe it is that Portuguese Literature is just as important as most folks poop, or whatever, but in the end, there are just as many examples of things working as there are of things not working.
 
I did several issues on my own, usually around a theme in its entirety ... and one of the most intriguing one was about an artist's "deva" paintings and the poems that went with it ... that really threw off some folks, and the pictures were even more out there, and were magnificent doodles. I have to post those for Sharke to see.

Moshkito
I have to post those for Sharke to see.

Right topic?
 

Beepster
They'll probably get a real human involved to check it out and all will be well. 

Yeah, I'm sure you're right Beep.
 
The ball is in "their" court, and the adverts have gone for now, so I'm just sitting back and getting on with other things now. I was mainly curious if any other "youtubers" have had this issue.
 
cheers
 
andy