Definitive Proof Of Just How Good The Axe-Fx Is!!!

Toopy14

Toopy14

Axe-Master
I received this email from Soundcloud...

"Hi User 572619291,
We’ve received a report directly from Universal Music Group that your track "U2 - I Will Follow Clip" contains "I WILL FOLLOW" by U2. As a result, your track has been removed from your profile for the time being."

"your track "U2 - I Will Follow Clip" contains "I WILL FOLLOW" by U2."

Duh...I know, it says so in the title! ;)
 
Last edited:
LOL...I'm not sure what to do now. I'm trying to dispute the claim, but it's a vicious circle!

I selected the option below, ie. a cover of someone else's song...but then under reason, if I select 'Some other reason', they say that basically I will be denied! :mad:


“U2 - I Will Follow Clip” is:
  • Your version of someone else’s song (i.e. a cover version or remix)
Tell us the reason for your dispute
You are allowed to upload “U2 - I Will Follow Clip” because:

  • I have written permission from all relevant rightsholders
  • The original work is not protected by copyright
  • My version is an official release, authorised by the copyright owner.
  • Some other reason
 
Last edited:
Sounds like Soundcloud is trying to obey copyright laws. Are you or are you not violating copyright? It sucks to be singled out when so much infringement exists on the internet. I'm not sure what the law is regarding covers that are not for sale in any way.

FWIW, Soundcloud pulled my cover of Queen's "Tie Your Mother Down" for the same reason. I disputed, and they allowed me to put it back up.
 
Tip: Replace a few characters in the title with similar characters to avoid automatic searches for popular song titles.

ie "U 2 - 1 Will Follow cover"
 
^This.

My guess is that the file was tracked just by the name, not by the "sound". Replace the name including "cover" in the title and deleting "U2".
I usually put the real name of the song in the title and I explain in the description that it's a cover from "x" band. If you want it to be easily searchable use tags about the name of the cover and the band.

An example:



EDIT:
Uhm, I really don't know... I see full retail songs with name of the band and title uploaded. Even with the album art cover. So I guess it's hit-and-miss.
 
Last edited:
IMHO, tutorials should be fine - if "tutorial" or "lesson" is in the title, then the sniffer software probably leaves it for higher paydirt. If its strictly a cover and you don't want to say its a tutorial, as said above you can slightly alter the title - its not likely that they are able to quickly scan for music. The scanning functions being used by labels, you tube and stuff are probably good for a limited amount of high priority stuff; where they can look for a "signature" piece of audio - such as a new film or hit song, or some very classic stuff. But the bulk of what they do via software would probably be just looking at who is basically admitting to duplicating the more popular high revenue earning (or should have done so) stuff. This cuts out the manual labor of actually checking up. I agree that getting away with posting a cover or song like that in an obvious place is hit or miss because loads of stuff is up there violating all the time.
 
I had a cover of an STP song get flagged on youtube. Since then I write song copyright by respective owners, work is not my own. I don't think it matters, they can do what they want really. Hell bars even pay to allow bands to play covers at their establishment. I have no idea how they enforce that, or pay monies to the artists.
 
dpeterson said:
I had a cover of an STP song get flagged on youtube. Since then I write song copyright by respective owners, work is not my own. I don't think it matters, they can do what they want really. Hell bars even pay to allow bands to play covers at their establishment. I have no idea how they enforce that, or pay monies to the artists.
Click to expand...

My understanding is the mechanical royalties you would have to pay for your recorded cover that you upload to Soundcloud etc is different than the performance license that bars etc pay. I also think it's the case that bars and restaurants pay that performance license to be able to play radio, and the blanket license covers everything. Enforcement is probably centered around spot checks and risk of a business-ending lawsuit if you're found without a license.

Whether/how much those organizations actually pay down to the artists is a pretty big sticking point, but there are many more educated/opinionated people you can find online to inform you about that aspect of it :)
 
I think its intellectual property even as a cover..

If I remember right, you can do covers on youtube because of some general licence they have implemented for covers. I'll try to find a link there.
 
dpeterson said:
I had a cover of an STP song get flagged on youtube. Since then I write song copyright by respective owners, work is not my own. I don't think it matters, they can do what they want really. Hell bars even pay to allow bands to play covers at their establishment. I have no idea how they enforce that, or pay monies to the artists.
Click to expand...
I'm sure they don't pay the original artists. It most likely costs more to run this scam then they make. Or they pocket the proceeds,
 
OP It's not that it sounds just like the original recording, it's that you did it at all. The rights to the song itself is the issue.
 
I have something that Youtube won't allow as well. Nailed every time. A short demo of some gear. Ended up uploading it to my website instead, and embedding it with an HTML5 player...where it will be missed by the majority of people searching for demos of my stuff.
 
USMC_Trev said:
OP It's not that it sounds just like the original recording, it's that you did it at all. The rights to the song itself is the issue.
Click to expand...

I agree. I was being a bit tongue-in-cheek! :)

I'm sure it was just a random automated search.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom