But thats the issue though, is there a time limit or something. It can't be less than 30 seconds because at that point I don't need a license from Freedom because that is covered by actual fair use. Its easy to say use less but then whats the point of getting a license to use the footage in the first place?
YouTube WTF!! Freedom's own Royalty Free Footage Got Me A Copyright Strike and Monetization Disabled!!
Well it's a fact that the less you use the easier you'll get rid of BS claims. In that case the license didn't work whatsoever and if you'd used less and not deleted the video you could have gotten rid of that BS claim. Licenses are another thing right on the terrible side of YouTube. The license Freedom gives you is nice but the way it's set up the thing is just doomed to fail. They give third party content away through a third party, all of which being companies interested in your revenue... While it's epic to get access to free videos having to deal with things like that comes as a prize sadly...
Something to know for next time, you should've been able to submit a counter notification that sends a message to the claimer or the company that striked the video that the video isn't breaking copyright laws with your reason (e.g. fair use) along with very personal information (like legal names and your address) but instead of using your information, you obtain the information required for the form from your network and use that. Then your network will have no choice but to deal with it.
This is the perks and duties of a network and I have contacted Freedom! support whether they can give their information for these counter notification forms and they replied with something vague like "if anything does occur feel free to contact us". If Freedom! support said that your video was fine then they should have no reason to decline the use of their information on the form.
I hope this helps.
This is the perks and duties of a network and I have contacted Freedom! support whether they can give their information for these counter notification forms and they replied with something vague like "if anything does occur feel free to contact us". If Freedom! support said that your video was fine then they should have no reason to decline the use of their information on the form.
I hope this helps.
Actually I asked freedom if I should counter it and I followed that advice but it didn't work. Yes they did ask for me to counter it my self!! Check my support case!
Then thats when Freedom said they would investigate but they never did anything. You guys are still being ignorant of the fact that I had monetization disabled after I left Freedom.
When monetization is disabled on a channel, the only way to get monetization back is to either get the copyright resolved which Freedom didn't do for several months and the proof was in the support cases. Or remove the video so that the actual penalty of three months starts. That is the rule from Google, you check there forums for your self.
So because I knew Freedom did nothing for SEVERAL MONTHS I had to take to things into my own hands and remove the video so I can finally get my channel back after serving the three month monetization penalty.[DOUBLEPOST=1486557159][/DOUBLEPOST]
But it wasn't a third party company though. FOM were the real owners of the clip. Reuters have a license to the content from FOM. That is why FOM are taking down my video because they don't believe I have the license. If Freedom had contacted Reuters and Formula One Management, then me and many other Freedom partners wouldn't been in the situation that we are in. A lot of people rely on the revenue on there channel and to have that taken away because the network didn't do there job is frustrating.
Last edited:
They are a company Freedom doesn't have access to fully and a company interested in protecting their online content.
And that my friend is the best way to get legal issues alongside with channel termination. In appealing a claim you are asked to separately provide who's the person who gave you the license and who you are as individual and/or company. If you tell them you are anyTV that's not only against every terms of service or contractual agreement you ever agreed to but also against the law.
But who said I represented my self as AnyTV? Read into the case #172060
Here is what I was advised from Freedom support.
Source: Case #172060
Freedom! AdminSeptember 05, 2016 21:09
Re: I Used reuters footage but still got COPYRIGHT!
Hey Michael,
You need to dispute the claim with the following text:
"This footage was licensed to me by Reuters through a partnership with my MCN Freedom. Please release this and any other claims you may have on this footage as Reuters is the owner of this clip with sole enforcement rights."
As a partner of ours, you have the right to use the footage as we have a licensing agreement with Reuters.
So dispute it, tell them the above, and the claim should be removed.
Thanks and have a great day!
This was in a reply to OnlyUltimate.
Did you dispute it that way through YouTube though as explained in that support ticket reply?
PS: I don't work at Freedom so I can't read support tickets.
I did everything support asked me to do. And sorry i didn't realise you were replying to OnlyUltimate.
This is what is said in the email
Hi Oversteer,
After reviewing your dispute, Formula One Management has decided that their copyright claim is still valid.
Video title: F1 2016 Belgium Highlights - Belgian Grand Prix - Spa Francorchamps - OVERSTEER
Includes: Visual content
Claimed by: Formula One Management
Why this can happen
- The copyright owner might disagree with your dispute.
- The reason you gave for disputing the claim may have been insufficient or invalid.
- The YouTube Team
Wrong, you're not lying about who you are, you are giving the information of the person dealing with it. Also, I said to get permission first so you can do it.[DOUBLEPOST=1486639316][/DOUBLEPOST]Here's pyrocynical's video:
He says that filing a response by yourself is dangerous (as all the personal information gets sent to the company so they get your address, etc and it can be abused by them) and will never work, the only way to get a successful response is to do it via your network. He even says that channels over 5000 subscribers should join a network just for this reason alone or your channel would pretty much be ruined when it gets a copyright strike.
And @LW001 he says that you can use information provided to you by the network instead of your information to avoid legal harassment from the claimer rather than get legal issues. You clearly aren't well informed about this type of issue on YouTube.[DOUBLEPOST=1486640737][/DOUBLEPOST]
You forgot something, you may have asked Freedom! whether to counter but you didn't ask if you can use their information instead of you. They should've have allowed you to since Freedom! support was fine with your video. I would almost guarantee you that the video would've been back up and the strike removed if you did that since you and Freedom! support can argue fair use and Reuter licensing however, you don't need a licence for fair use. It's a law originally made to protect content creators, such as news outlets, from being sued and silenced when criticising other media and using their copyrighted footage in a fair way that isn't slanderous. There is more to it but you can just google the legal definition. It is most likely a dispute over licence rather than fair use because of this. Again, I hope this helps clarify some things.
Last edited:
Well now that they denied that dispute they've probably reviewed it and the video probably isn't in public domain which would be Freedom's algorithm not having gotten rid of it...
...
If you had read that only.
As of sending your information there the thing is that you in Freedom's case are the owner of your content so filling out a DMCA Counter notice needs to be done on your part. If a company decides to abuse that information (why would they) then that's a whole other issue. Though I believe a F1 digital right network has much better to do than dox or SWAT you or whatever people do with data.
As of that video, look at when it was made. That was exactly around the time everyone complained about YouTube and copyright on YouTube. Back then it was the only way to really get this through though YouTube has changed this drastically. If you want an actual video with how it works exactly, look at an actual video and not a biased rant.
Also this entire video goes by the fact of individuals claiming it and not companies.
He isn't anything BUT biased, he is a reliable source though he does meme a bit but his videos are for entertainment after all. The copyright counter notification system is exactly the same since then so I don't know where you found it has changed. I'm not referencing the "rant" but more of the information that he provides. Also, there is more someone could do with information than SWAT and dox, I was talking in a legal sense.
In addition, YOU ARE filing the counter notification just with the details of the person for the claimer to contact in regarding the copyright claim. Everything else apart from the information is written by YOU the channel owner (e.g. reasons why copyright claim is incorrect). In fact, if you give the information of the network, they also must have permission from the channel owner to deal with it (e.g. the partnership) so permission is both ways just to clarify some more.
If a network refuses to deal with a copyright claim (via the method of dealing with the counter notification) and the copyright claim is ingenuine then that channel isn't part of a network, just an affiliate with said network that doesn't protect its affiliates.
Wow I forgot about that. What you are saying is very true. I've heard this from H3H3 before
I contacted support yesterday they said they couldn't do anything because FOM refused. In other words Freedom don't want to waste time protecting there partners from companies that are bigger than them.
Here is what they said :
Antonio FreedomToday at 10:31
Hello Michael,
Thank you for contacting Freedom! support. I'm sorry to know that you still have issues with your channel. I looked into your last ticket (172060) and sadly nothing has changed as you chose to leave the network. Discussions with Formula One Management didn't produce positive results I'm afraid, we apologize for the inconvenience this issue as caused to you and your channel. We licensed footage from Reuters, but still Formula One Management didn't accept the agreement we had as it goes against their very strict policy regarding usage of their content. We since then made improvements in the videos available in the dashboard, removing those that didn't comply with Formula One Management policies, and reviewed any other videos that could, potentially, cause problems. It's also important to understand that although we provide the footage, from our licensing deal with Reuters, the footage has to be used according to the Fair Use policy, just as any third party content, which if I understand correctly from what you said before, you were following. However, original copyright owners may still claim the content, which can be followed by a dispute from the content creator. Unfortunately, if not accepted, as Freedom! and YouTube do not provide legal advice, the parties can choose to solve the issue in a court of law, by opposing the copyright holder to the content creator.
We would gladly try to help, as that is what we did before and always do, but we are unable to because you left the network at that critical time when we were going through such a complex process involving legal rights. We are unable to get your monetization back, contact YouTube on your behalf, or provide you with a partnership, because of the monetization issue, and also because of other problematic content we found on your channel, that we also mentioned in that same ticket. As you said, you have worked hard on your channel to get where you are, so I hope you don't give up and continue working on it, even while monetization is disabled
This part is obviously a lie, I waited four months. and nothing happened : "but we are unable to because you left the network at that critical time when we were going through such a complex process involving legal rights."
Last edited:
What do you mean there... If they decide to sue you and the claim was false you have a huge ******* chance to win that...
I don't know if you got that but you literally just proved my point...
As of the rest, I'm not taking the time now to reply to that...
This is also true but I'm pretty sure its the networks responsibility especially in this case.
Well it is but as they've said at support they weren't able to secure that anymore and you leaving the network really disallows them to take any action for your channel and also (let's be real) takes their interest in helping you away.
They had 4 months to take action. Lets be real bro if they don't do anything in four months, its never going to happen.
Yeah, I understand why you left and everything, but now there's really nothing they or you can do. You could appeal the monetisation issues though and see if you're able to get monetisation back at least.
I'm on my own once again as always. Freedom said they can't do nothing, which is lie we both know Freedom have contacts. Its the least they could do for me because the last 4 months on youtube have been hell.