I’m in a bit of an awkward situation and could really use some advice. Today a customer contacted me in a very friendly and polite tone with a problem: he purchased one of my tracks to use in a video game, and the game has become quite popular. As a result, gamers and streamers are now uploading gameplay videos to YouTube.
My music is registered with CID, so although the customer and the game studio can clear their claims, there’s no way to prevent the claims from affecting streamers. This is leading to de-monetized or even taken-down videos, which are essential for promoting a mid-tier game like this one.
I’ve composed custom music for games before, but always with higher budgets and rights transfer agreements involved. I’ve never encountered a situation where the customer has the proper license, but the players, of course, don’t (and won’t).
Has anyone dealt with something similar? Do you know if there’s any way I can help the customer avoid these issues for the game’s players? The only solution I can think of is to propose composing a custom sound-alike track at a fair price that wouldn’t be registered with CID. But it feels a bit strange, as using music from Envato for games should be a pretty common usage while CID makes it almost impossible for streamers to upload gameplay videos without issues… Is there any known workaround for this? (Update: as far as I could read in gaming forums and watched in YT tuts, streamers do not own the license so they have to mute the music if they want to monetize their videos).
I’ll also reach out to support and Identifyy, but I’d really appreciate any advice or similar experiences anyone here can share.
I had a similar case recently.
My music is used in a video game. Some players reached out to me and i cleared the claims manually (by providing the links to Identifyy)
Video game composers do no register their music to Content ID, as far as i know. Because every game play video will get a copyright strike. And there is no solution except manual whitelisting.
Even AAA games players need to mute music for streams and that’s normal, majority of streamers knows that and they don’t mind as they will use some other music in the background which isn’t registered, while playing that game. Those who don’t know, learn after getting their videos flagged. I’m a long time gamer and game tester over 4 years, I also promote games for many developers /publishers, and I make music as well, so I’m saying this from personal experience. 90% of music available to developers for games is registered with CID. That’s common practice. The only way to avoid that is to make custom music for that game developer and not register, which allows gamers to freely upload that game. Such music of course always costs more. If developer can make up to you for removing that music from CID, you can do that as well.
Why? They are not your customers and do not have a license. It is not the responsibility of the music author to cater to third-parties (the game players) needs. Buying a game does not mean buying the right to publish the music (through gameplay).
There is zero justification why it’s the music author who should give up on their rights, just so that a specific kind of content creators, gameplay streamers, can publish videos of their own, without having to license the copyrighted assets used in those videos.
The industry standard, and only viable way to do it, is to either have a license for the music, or mute it. No reason why it should be different for music bought on Envato.
100% agree with you here. Envato also need to limit usage of Elements music for game projects. As I said before, this is killing of their and our income. It’s really upsetting to see my music used in big projects for zero.
I think you shouldnt clear it for gamers. The developers only bought a license for the game. I can see why they would love to have it cleared for everyone as it will promote their game more if the youtubers can monetize. But you wont make anything extra…
My music is in two games too and it’s used in a lot of gameplay videos. Indeed some should mute it if they want to monetise.
I talked to identifyy about this too and they told me that i can not manually claim game play videos but their system does pick it up manually.
I have my music on streaming platforms.
And sometimes people come to listen to my music from these gameplay videos. And some months the money i make from streaming is really good (3 sometimes 4 figures)
First off, thanks, everyone, for sharing your opinions and experiences. It’s incredibly valuable to have an input from authors who’ve been in similar situations.
So… everything seems to point in the same direction: the game developer holds the license rights, not the streamers, so if content creators wants to monetize their videos, they need a valid license like everyone else.
I’ve been reading many forums and watching videos on this topic since I received the customer email (which was, by the way, very polite and considerate). In all cases, the workaround seems to be the same: mute the music if you’re planning to stream and monetize.
If a content creator’s channel is large enough (we’re talking 19 bucks budget large ), and they really want to stream with the music on, they can likely afford it.
I totally understand and empathize with both the developer’s and the streamers perspectives but from a legl and basic common-sense viewpoint it only seems fair that if you want to monetize content featuring copyrighted work, the author of that work deserves their share. We’ve gotten too used to overlooking our rights for too long.
I’ll keep everyone posted here and once solved, I’ll probably ask to close this topic.
Ok, so I just got a reply from Envato support. As mentioned above only the license holder can clear their own content ID claims. Technically speaking, streamers will need their own license to use your work on their streams.
Anyway, I still feel there’s a lot of room to optimize the CID systems right now and I try to see things from both the authors and the creators perspective from an objective, ethical and fair viewpoint.
Hello mate!
I think I know the game and the company that sent you an email. Because I got the same. If you want, DM me to talk privately. I had a video call with them.
That’s a dangerous way to look at it, and not a reflection of reality.
No one is considered guilty here. Copyrighted material generate copyright claims, no judgment whatsoever. You got a license for using the music? great, you can then clear the claim and monetize. It’s not a “prove me you’re not guilty” stance.
We as author cannot propagate such a biased vision that has been hurting us for years, especially in the early years. It’s 2024 and the system has been the industry standard fro years. Any content creator that still doesn’t know how to deal with it, it’s on them.
And thank god for ContentID when you see there is a whole bunch of content creators who feel they should be able to use your music in their monetized videos, because… they bought the game. And we authors should feel guilty for this?
I agree and edited my post. So -and I want to make very clear that I’m not judging at all- your take on gameplay content that uses RF, CID registred music, is that each creator should get his own license or, well, not monetize? Wouldn’t that discourage -at the least- a huge amount of creators, blocking one of the strongest ways to promote a game? All this eventually leading them to opt for other platforms or go back to ye old tailored music.
Just gathering opinions here. The standard and legal procedure is more than clear and it’s been stated above: streamers will need their own license to use your work on their contents.
Well of course, why should it be any different? Any content creator has to have a license if they are to use copyrighted material. Why would there be an exception for a certain type of content creators? It doesn’t make any sense.
If gameplay videos from users are one of the strongest ways to promote a game, then let the game developers worry about it. Why should a music author with no connection to the game company should give away their music for free to players who intend to make money off those videos?
We music authors have a tendency to let others take advantage of us. This being a clear example.
Just wanted to share something that happened again: a game studio that licensed one of my tracks relied on YouTubers to promote their game through shared and streamed gameplay videos. As expected, once those videos started going online, they were hit with claims and demonetized, leading content creators to lose interest in sharing them.
I know we’ve discussed this before, and I understand that only the developer (customer) holds the license, meaning any YouTuber who wants to monetize gameplay would technically need to buy their own license. Still, this setup probably discourages studios from using RF music in their games under the current terms…
I just wanted to bring this up again. I kinda see both sides of the issue, but what do you people think?
EDIT: Here’s a Reddit thread that shows how standard is for streamers to receive these claims, even with commissioned custom soundtracks.
Again and again I will repeat: the biggest cash for us is in virals. We sell cheap licenses here. So it is in our interest to distribute music wherever it is possible and monetize, collect additional royalties. As you have noticed, gameplays generate CID earnings, which can be very high. Way higher than sync licenses on a cheap stock. And that’s fair for the industry. If someone needs CID-free music, he should buy an expensive no-CID music.
Think of GTA. GTA gameplays are full of claims. That’s normal.
If that’s their marketing strategy indeed, then they should put some money towards that strategy and pay the license for their players. Simple as that. Why on earth would it be the music author’s responsibility to pay for it?
So, they were making money off those videos… and yet can’t be bothered to clear copyrights? That’s on them, not on the music author.
To recaps, players are making money out of gameplay videos. Game studio is saving money on advertising and is making money by selling more games… meanwhile the music author should get nothing for having their copyrighted assets used, or should feel guilty for having their rights upheld?!
This topic is the embodiment of music authors being taken for fools that can so easily be taken advantage of.
The biggest—seriously, the biggest—mistake Envato made was allowing music to be licensed for games through Elements subscriptions. I asked Envato to change this policy, but nothing has changed yet.
@KingDog@BenLeong – Is it possible to bring this concern to the Envato team? Why are we allowing our music to be licensed almost for free for games that generate significant revenue?
I’m not sure I follow your reasoning. How is the method of license acquisition relevant here? I mean the “issue” for gamers is the same whether the game studio bought the license, or got it through their subscription, isn’t it?
), and they really want to stream with the music on, they can likely afford it.