# YouTube and Copyrighted Music **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [February 1, 2015, 11:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youtube-and-copyrighted-music/711553 "2015-02-01T23:15:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![dolphinboy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dolphinboy/32/330_2.png) [@dolphinboy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dolphinboy)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2015, 11:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youtube-and-copyrighted-music/711553/1 "2015-02-01T23:15:20Z")
Why does YouTube allow people to post copyrighted music that can be easily downloaded to a computer? They don’t allow movies to be posted, do they? Is it because they aren’t CD quality? Does ASCAP and BMI not care? ---
**Author:** ![Kent\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kent_clark/32/105_2.png) [@Kent\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kent_Clark)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2015, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youtube-and-copyrighted-music/711553/2 "2015-02-01T23:29:01Z")
The short answer is, they don’t. Look at their [Terms of Service](https://www.youtube.com/static?template=terms). > [@](#): > > You shall be solely responsible for your own Content and the consequences of submitting and publishing your Content on the Service. You affirm, represent, and warrant that you own or have the necessary licenses, rights, consents, and permissions to publish Content you submit; and you license to YouTube all patent, trademark, trade secret, copyright or other proprietary rights in and to such Content for publication on the Service pursuant to these Terms of Service. Followed by some more stuff, then > [@](#): > > You further agree that Content you submit to the Service will not contain third party copyrighted material, or material that is subject to other third party proprietary rights, unless you have permission from the rightful owner of the material or you are otherwise legally entitled to post the material and to grant YouTube all of the license rights granted herein. Of course, YouTube isn’t the copyright police. Normally someone needs to complain before they take action. If the actual copyright holder complains, the offending material will be taken down and the poster can have service terminated. ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Finn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dewey_finn/32/4222_2.png) [@Dewey\_Finn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Finn)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2015, 11:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youtube-and-copyrighted-music/711553/3 "2015-02-01T23:35:01Z")
My understanding is that the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act puts the [burden on the copyright holder](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_Copyright_Infringement_Liability_Limitation_Act#Notice_from_copyright_owner) to notify YouTube (or whichever site is hosting the content) of the infringement. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2015, 11:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youtube-and-copyrighted-music/711553/4 "2015-02-01T23:47:44Z")
There’s no possible GQ answer without the ability of holding a gun to the heads of the execs at YouTube. Realistically, they allow copyright material because it is incredibly profitable for them. Sure, people post their own videos there but the business model is clearly based on drawing hundreds of millions of views from the draw of copyrighted material: music, television, comedy, movies. Removing all that content would leave YouTube looking like swiss cheese. They made the knowing decision from the start to let anybody post anything, which meant allowing them to post other peoples’ works. They also knew that the copyright holders could never keep up with takedown demands. Only the biggest media conglomerates can afford the legion of full-time staffers needed to hunt down violators. It was a good business decision. YouTube is the go-to place to find anything. People get annoyed if the content they want isn’t there. Policing YouTube is no longer possible, and the culture has shifted to make their model acceptable. You can argue that when a billion people commit a crime, it’s no longer a crime. But yet YouTube will take down content if properly asked. So is it or isn’t it? The Web exists in the same duality as Schrodinger’s Cat. ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Strangelove](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dr.strangelove/32/6613_2.png) [@Dr.Strangelove](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Strangelove)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2015, 11:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youtube-and-copyrighted-music/711553/5 "2015-02-01T23:47:46Z")
> [@kunilou](#): > > Of course, YouTube isn’t the copyright police. Normally someone needs to complain before they take action. If the actual copyright holder complains, the offending material will be taken down and the poster can have service terminated. It’s more complicated than that. YouTube maintains a fairly sophisticated content identification system that tries to auto-detect copyrighted material (that had been previously submitted by copyright owners). So they police themselves partly. If there’s an identified violation, the owner may then block or mute a video. Perhaps more cleverly, they may also make money from the video via advertising, or do things like direct viewers to a place to purchase an album. See [here](https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2797370?hl=en) for more details. It doesn’t detect everything of course, so for things that slip through the cracks there’s a normal complaint system in place. ---
**Author:** ![vomit\_comet](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/73ab20/32.png) [@vomit\_comet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vomit_comet)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2015, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youtube-and-copyrighted-music/711553/6 "2015-02-02T01:06:00Z")
It depends on the copyright holder as well. I have a video with a Metallica song on it and they simply advertise to sell copies of the song on the video page and they do not allow me to place advertising on the video. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2015, 2:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youtube-and-copyrighted-music/711553/7 "2015-02-02T02:18:15Z")
> [@vomit\_comet](#): > > It depends on the copyright holder as well. I have a video with a Metallica song on it and they simply advertise to sell copies of the song on the video page and they do not allow me to place advertising on the video. Who is “they”? ---
**Author:** ![friedo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8edcca/32.png) [@friedo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/friedo)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2015, 2:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youtube-and-copyrighted-music/711553/8 "2015-02-02T02:43:30Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > Who is “they”? Sony Music Entertainment, in the case of Metallica. ETA: Or maybe Warner depending on which album we’re talking about. ---
**Author:** ![usedtobe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ec9cab/32.png) [@usedtobe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/usedtobe)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2015, 4:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youtube-and-copyrighted-music/711553/9 "2015-02-02T04:45:49Z")
Before it was bought by Google, there was a cat-and-mouse game going over copyrighted materials. Case in point: a WB cartune “Coal Black and De Sebben Dwarfs” Intially, the character’s name was “So White” (she self-identifies as such in the intro tune), but Disney never has had a sense of humor. I knew some folks determined to get this thing distributed - they just came up with new ID’s and re-posted it. Go find it - it is one of the best cartunes WB ever produced. ---
**Author:** ![psychonaut](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/psychonaut/32/4655_2.png) [@psychonaut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/psychonaut)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2015, 10:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youtube-and-copyrighted-music/711553/10 "2015-02-02T10:36:15Z")
> [@Dr.Strangelove](#): > > It’s more complicated than that. YouTube maintains a fairly sophisticated content identification system that tries to auto-detect copyrighted material (that had been previously submitted by copyright owners). So they police themselves partly. It’s certainly sophisticated, but in my experience it produces a lot of false positives. I recently uploaded about a hundred of my own recordings of freely distributable arrangements of old classical music (Bach, Beethoven, Chopin, etc.). YouTube’s content identification system flagged about 5% of them as violating the copyright to some modern works. From the titles it gave I gather it misidentified them as pop tunes which quote or riff on classical works. If the copyright holders of these unrelated pieces fraudulently issue DMCA takedowns, I hope it proves embarrassing to them (and to Google). ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Strangelove](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dr.strangelove/32/6613_2.png) [@Dr.Strangelove](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Strangelove)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2015, 11:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youtube-and-copyrighted-music/711553/11 "2015-02-02T11:18:51Z")
> [@psychonaut](#): > > It’s certainly sophisticated, but in my experience it produces a lot of false positives. Yeah, it’s by no means perfect. I haven’t had any false positives myself (I generally don’t have any music for my uploads), but I know people who have. Some people make it sound like YouTube is a big copyright-violating bonanza that the copyright holders just have to live with. Well, it is partly that, but the enforcement is invasive enough and subject to so many false positives that it’s by no means a one-way deal. Lots of people who are not violating copyright at all, or doing it entirely within the bounds of fair use, still get their stuff taken down. Sometimes it works itself out through the mediation process, but not always. I don’t think the big groups like Sony or whoever have the slightest bit of shame about issuing fraudulent takedowns, though. What’s the downside from their perspective? Individuals aren’t going to sue them in return; it’s not worth it. I didn’t verify this personally so take it with a grain of salt, but I’ve heard of cases where individually-produced content was _stolen_ by some big media company for a TV show or the like–and then the _original_ content was tagged as a copyright violation! ---
**Author:** ![psychonaut](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/psychonaut/32/4655_2.png) [@psychonaut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/psychonaut)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2015, 11:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youtube-and-copyrighted-music/711553/12 "2015-02-02T11:54:51Z")
> [@Dr.Strangelove](#): > > I don’t think the big groups like Sony or whoever have the slightest bit of shame about issuing fraudulent takedowns, though. What’s the downside from their perspective? Individuals aren’t going to sue them in return; it’s not worth it. True, they don’t tend to get sued, even when fairly famous artists get their own work fraudulently pulled. (In fact, I started a [a thread about this very topic](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=571611) a few years ago.) Though in some cases fraudulent DMCA takedowns do generate a lot of negative publicity for the perpetrators. > [@](#): > > I didn’t verify this personally so take it with a grain of salt, but I’ve heard of cases where individually-produced content was _stolen_ by some big media company for a TV show or the like–and then the _original_ content was tagged as a copyright violation! I haven’t heard of such a case either, though given the number of high-profile cases where a media conglomerate has infringed the copyright of an independent artist ([Fox and Jonathan Coulton](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Coulton#Glee_dispute), [Geffen/Universal and Commodore demosceners](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timbaland_plagiarism_controversy), etc.), it certainly wouldn’t surprise me. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2015, 12:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youtube-and-copyrighted-music/711553/13 "2015-02-02T12:52:13Z")
> [@dolphinboy](#): > > Why does YouTube allow people to post copyrighted music that can be easily downloaded to a computer? They don’t allow movies to be posted, do they? Is it because they aren’t CD quality? Does ASCAP and BMI not care? They allow it for the simple reason that the law lets them off the hook for infringing content posted by users. The DMCA makes it a copyright holder’s burden to fund infringement and make use of the notice-and-takedown process. YouTube’s obligation is to respond appropriately to such notices. Everyone else is dissatisfied with notice and takedown. Users think it’s too susceptible to false claims of infringement and copyright holders think it’s unfair to put the entire burden on them when TouRube knows damn well that a huge proportion of the stuff on its servers are infringing. ---
**Author:** ![dolphinboy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dolphinboy/32/330_2.png) [@dolphinboy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dolphinboy)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2015, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youtube-and-copyrighted-music/711553/14 "2015-02-02T14:48:37Z")
Thanks everyone for fighting by ignorance. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2015, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youtube-and-copyrighted-music/711553/15 "2015-02-02T17:01:40Z")
> [@dolphinboy](#): > > Thanks everyone for fighting by ignorance. That’s an unfortunate typo. There’s far too much fighting by ignorance happening on the Dope and on the Internet as it is! ---
**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2015, 10:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youtube-and-copyrighted-music/711553/16 "2015-02-02T22:25:08Z")
I think the content scanning is done less by YouTube than by copyright holders (or wanna-bees). I’ve had royalty-free music that I purchased flagged as owned by someone (wrong) and I’ve been hit by a copyright claim made by a company based in India for a 17th-century Latin church song (wrong twice). Both claims were dropped quickly when I challenged them, as they were absurd. In contrast, a recent video I posted included short (fair-use) clips of some tunes from the last century. Out of 10 tunes, only 2 were challenged. So I don’t think it’s YouTube doing the scanning. ---
**Author:** ![vomit\_comet](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/73ab20/32.png) [@vomit\_comet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vomit_comet)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2015, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youtube-and-copyrighted-music/711553/17 "2015-02-03T03:32:10Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > Who is “they”? I presume the first ‘they’ is the copyright holder and the second ‘they’ would be Youtube. ---
**Author:** ![psychonaut](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/psychonaut/32/4655_2.png) [@psychonaut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/psychonaut)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2015, 9:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youtube-and-copyrighted-music/711553/19 "2015-02-03T09:36:11Z")
> [@Musicat](#): > > I think the content scanning is done less by YouTube than by copyright holders (or wanna-bees). I’ve had royalty-free music that I purchased flagged as owned by someone (wrong) and I’ve been hit by a copyright claim made by a company based in India for a 17th-century Latin church song (wrong twice). Both claims were dropped quickly when I challenged them, as they were absurd. > > In contrast, a recent video I posted included short (fair-use) clips of some tunes from the last century. Out of 10 tunes, only 2 were challenged. > > So I don’t think it’s YouTube doing the scanning. I don’t see how your conclusion follows from your premise. Outrageously false positives are more likely the work of a computer algorithm, not a human. But we need not speculate on who’s doing the scanning, since YouTube openly says that it runs the Content ID system itself (see for example [Qualifying for Content ID](https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/1311402?hl=en)), and there’s plenty of corroboration of this by rights holders (such as [Zoe Keating](http://zoekeating.tumblr.com/post/108898194009/what-should-i-do-about-youtube)), many of whom are independent artists who could not possibly hope to scan through millions of uploads themselves. ---
**Author:** ![Knowed\_Out](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/knowed_out/32/7380_2.png) [@Knowed\_Out](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Knowed_Out)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2015, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youtube-and-copyrighted-music/711553/20 "2015-02-03T19:35:48Z")
Some uploaders get around the copyright issue for music by increasing the speed slightly, so the entire song/album is one key higher. If a song’s in C major, it now plays as D major. ---
**Author:** ![GreasyJack](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/df705f/32.png) [@GreasyJack](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreasyJack)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2015, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youtube-and-copyrighted-music/711553/21 "2015-02-03T22:05:33Z")
It’s also a not entirely trivial amount of hassle dealing with the third party tools to download something off the site. That probably deters enough people that content owners have a decent chance of converting Youtube views into legitimate digital download sales. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/youtube-and-copyrighted-music/711553.md?page=2)