|Denial of Monetisation of video/content that I own complete rights to.||jayc242||7/4/12 2:13 AM|
I've recently requested that some of my videos be monetised and I received notification from Youtube/Google that suggest that I might not be the owner of the content of 3 of my submissions.
In the case of one, I own complete rights on the upload but there appears to be no way that I can request a review.
2 of my submissions may contain content that I do not own complete rights to, and I accept this.
Why is it so hard to contact you people??? I can understand with the sheer volume of users but please at least offer some means of contact.
<!-- Begin reference generated HTML -->
|Re: Denial of Monetisation of video/content that I own complete rights to.||wickedtonguemusic||7/4/12 2:56 AM|
Same here - totally original songs, registered with PRS, ISRC etc etc etc; totally self-filmed video content featuring band members etc etc etc, but any discussion the thread gets closed and I get directed to a useless "help page" which answers none of the questions.
Monetisation enabled on one video but not on two others, including one which is receiving views at over 300 per day.
Even this blinking forum is a nightmare to use. If it was a maze we'd all die before help arrived.
|Re: Denial of Monetisation of video/content that I own complete rights to.||jayc242||7/4/12 3:12 AM|
I can sort of understand why they make it harder to contact them with the volume of users but to make it nigh on impossible to contact 'them' (totally impossible at moment!) it does their public image no good. My current videos are not quite up to the levels of 300+ per day that you receive but with Monetisation coming my way, there will be lots more ORIGINAL content being uploaded as long as it isn't just thrown in ones face by some automated censor :-/
|Re: Denial of Monetisation of video/content that I own complete rights to.||jayc242||7/4/12 3:17 AM|
"...we'd all die before help arrived"
I get the impression that this might be on their minds in some cases :D
|Re: Denial of Monetisation of video/content that I own complete rights to.||inbredfreak||7/4/12 8:15 AM|
getting very frustrated at the lack of support Youtube offers on this subject.. links to generic info that I already understand from emails that do not identify the exact issue that is at fault..
Graphic used are made by me and none advertise a third party..
So I am totally confused at what else I can provide that will make Youtube happy.
|Re: Denial of Monetisation of video/content that I own complete rights to.||CaptRobLee||7/4/12 8:35 AM|
Receiving the first email stating revenue sharing has been denied isn't a bad thing. It means YouTube has a question about you having all the necessary commercial use rights to the content of your video.
The email contains a special link, it's located just below the video title, for you to use to submit the documentation. Then you must wait for staff to review your case.
|Re: Denial of Monetisation of video/content that I own complete rights to.||kwitaker||7/4/12 8:51 AM|
Except in 90% of cases the cases don't get reviewed, people have been waiting months
|Re: Denial of Monetisation of video/content that I own complete rights to.||inbredfreak||7/5/12 4:06 PM|
Done that on 7 videos.. not one helpful reply.. just get denied again..
That said I finally worked out what was getting me denied.. (i think) I uploaded a new video without an in video graphic overlay of my brand logo.. got accepted immediately..
So for me it looks like they would not allow me to self brand my own videos O.o.. that sucks!
Uploading another video tonight.. will let you know the outcome..
|Re: Denial of Monetisation of video/content that I own complete rights to.||inbredfreak||7/5/12 4:39 PM|
Just had another video accepted.. so my issue definitely looks like it was denied minimisation on the basis I had in video graphic overlays of my logo.. :-(
|Re: Denial of Monetisation of video/content that I own complete rights to.||jayc242||7/5/12 5:31 PM|
Hmm I wonder..
I know in the case of the video in question in this thread, a logo is used but it aint mine.
I have been communicating with the owners of the software I used to generate the simulation and they were very clear on the subject - They are fine as long as :
I wonder whether Googles AUTOMATIC detection of potential areas of copyright infringement is the simplest way (for Google) to avoid involvement in any legal wranglings. It can be perceived as shooting first, ask questions later by Google if that is indeed how it works but it still means that the system they use will continue to cause problems for some uploaders of Original material that they own complete rights to.
@inbredfreak (lol love the name) I think it would be wrong of an organisation appearing to uphold copyright (Google), to stop people branding their own products or even watermarking content to deter theft.
|Re: Denial of Monetisation of video/content that I own complete rights to.||jayc242||7/5/12 5:40 PM|
Denied minimisation? :D
I think they keyword here is Commercial Gain.
|Re: Denial of Monetisation of video/content that I own complete rights to.||David Lundin||7/6/12 1:46 AM|
Den fredagen den 6:e juli 2012 kl. 02:31:28 UTC+2 skrev jayc242:
Monetization is commercial use. You are not following the terms set to you by the owners of the logo, and if you included those permission in the documentation you sent to Youtube, that'll explain it. If you didn't include it, that'll probably be the reason itself.
|jayc242||7/6/12 3:25 AM||<This message has been deleted.>|
|Re: Denial of Monetisation of video/content that I own complete rights to.||jayc242||7/6/12 3:27 AM|
More message actions
11:25 AM (less than a minute ago)
"Monetisation is commercial use"
With the advent of Googles/Youtubes latest drive to offer existing non-partners the ability to Monetise their uploaded content, one must first decide whether it is worthwhile.
If I was to follow the terms & conditions set by the owners of the logo in question that Youtube/Google are asking for evidence to show ownership or license to use other peoples intellectual property now, it may POSSIBLY explain why monetisation was denied. As things stand, I have a choice. I can either choose not to monetise the video in question OR I can provide documentation (which I now have) to show that I have permission to use the owners intellectual property - For commercial gain or not for commercial gain.
I'm not sure what problem 'inbredfreak' is having but I was trying to figure out what was causing him problems in obtaining monetisation on his uploaded content so that I might better understand my own issues with obtaining it.
I am also trying to be helpful to other users too by posting on this forum.
|Re: Denial of Monetisation of video/content that I own complete rights to.||inbredfreak||7/7/12 7:51 AM|
SInce removing "My Logo" and "My Domain Name" from my videos as graphic overlays I have not been denied monetisation.
I have a feeling Youtube are just blindly checking for static graphics/text embedded in the video footage during upload and simply denying the content as it's just easy for them to deny and make us prove otherwise.
So frustrating.. especially when they don't provide the reason fro denial.
Now my next issue is getting the additional features that Youtube Partners have like custom thumbnails and scheduled uploads.. I applied and was informed they no longer accept partner requests and I have to wait for a general rollout.. sigh..
Why Youtube have to make things so awkward..
|Re: Denial of Monetisation of video/content that I own complete rights to.||CaptRobLee||7/7/12 8:02 AM|
If you are uploading game play videos, for example Minecraft, then placing your logo and domain name on the video violates Minecraft's copyright. The reason is the logo and domain imply you own the content. This might be a reason they are being denied monetization.
|Re: Denial of Monetisation of video/content that I own complete rights to.||David Lundin||7/7/12 8:26 AM|
Actually that's not really what the brand guidelines for Minecraft say. They're very clear that you cannot use their logos or names in any way, as to make what you do seem "official" somehow. They never mention putting your logos on there though, as long as it's obvious you're not them. That doesn't mean you won't get stuck in the Youtube system every single time though, and that in itself is probably a good reason to keep it subtle.
|Re: Denial of Monetisation of video/content that I own complete rights to.||David Lundin||7/7/12 8:27 AM|
Man, I phrased some parts weirdly there. I think I got the point across though :-)