Has anybody moved his tracks from AdRev to Identify? Or has two CID partners?

I just put this link to all items description:

1 Like

I had done that for AdRev… now I have 249 items with an obsolete and thus confusing pdf, which I need to either replace with Identifyy info, or remove altogether. Fun times ahead!


I would love to see an Envato tool that lets you upload / replace one single ‘global’ PDF file into every item’s zip. Or at the very least a bulk item editor.


Hi guys, I had some chitchat with the AdRev support in October/November because I recognized that my tracks are not claimed anymore.

Adrev told me that Youtube last year changed their Royalty Free Music policy and ANY content ID partner (such as adrev, identifyy and others) are not allowed to claim royalty free music automatically anymore.

So now I am wondering: Is that true? Does identifyy - like adrev - refuse to claim videos with royalty free songs? Or is Identifyy at least able to show me the videos and decide myself if I want to claim?

Maybe someone can give an update how Identifyy has been in the last months? @RedOctopus @AurusAudio @Manriquedelara

Identifyy still claim content ID, i got no email about that from them.

One thing i know is, from summer, is really hard to find your claimed tracks in Youtube.
So we have to trust in the report, and only in that… I have found A LOT of bugs, dissapeared videos from one month to another, less views in the report than real, etc…


That’s why Identifyy probably makes manual claims. And it works like a charm.

AdRev is able to make manual claims BUT they refuse to do it.


Allright, thanks so much for the reply!!

1 Like

My experience has been the same as @Manriquedelara and @RedOctopus

Identifyy rocks!


AdRev has been saying that for years. But somehow it’s always “last year”. They’ve never been straightforward in their communication.

If manual claims actually mean “manual”, how is it possible to manually claim millions (or is it with a “b”?) of videos?

Manual claim is a Youtube CID term which means that claim has to be verified by a human.

Though such a verification can be somehow automated I suppose. I suppose.

Yes, somehow it just stopped to work as it should and it seems they never informed authors whenever accounts were put into Royalty Free mode.

This is exactly what AdRev told me but unfortunately they never claim any video if you are an RF author and that’s not how it should work.

Youtube just wants to avoid any claims on RF music - somehow relatable - but then they should somehow implement a system which can check for proper licensing.

Thanks for sharing your experience guys. Gonne give Identifyy a try. :slight_smile:

IMHO you’ve probably wasted a lot of money while staying with AdRev :confused: Not mentioning the copyright protection.

Hi, I recommend the best service in vydia, they pay 80% monthly royalties, and take the best customer care, send me the email address I will send an invitation to join the network. Recommend to all musicians to join vydia, the best copyright protection platform

I want to share my experience in Identifyy - I started uploading in May 2020, I missed the receipt of the first fee, because Pay Pal, did not accept the payment to my account, then I asked the team to pay me to the account of Payoneer. In December I received the first 511 dollars for the period from May to October, at the moment I see on the earnings page that for 3 months (October - December) 2020 already earned $ 580. :smiley:


Hi, we have agency deal with vydia and we have a label, nice if you want to join vydia and advance in your music career, send me your email, I’ll be in touch, And if you qualify, we’ll add you, always here to help new artists and maximize your earnings.

Whilst you ‘can’ do this, don’t you think it’s a bit ‘off’ when someone has bought a licence to then claim their money from their video?

If I’d bought a licence for a piece of music to then get claimed (and as I understand it, it’s ALL the ad revenue) - then I’d feel kinda cheated.

Or am I mis-understanding this? Why bother paying for the licence if they’re going to take all your money anyway?

Well, if authors dont register their tracks, someone else can do it and this has happened a lot. And you know what happen in that situation, even with the license the claim wont be removed.
That is a real cheat.

So many times we have seen about this, we are tired of this, we are covering us (authors) and we are covering you (as a customer).

wow, this is a ridiculous situation. Kinda feels like whoever sold the licence should be protecting their customers’ licence (in this case audiojungle) surely?

AJ in this case usually acts as a middleman.
I have seen here some authors who had to fight even with big companies about the copyright of their tracks, because the big ones registered them “first”.
That´s all, register them and nobody ask about the owner of the composition.
It was the author who had to prove he is the compositor. And that was a looooong road.

Actually I think you mis-understand it. If buyer has license, he has to simply upload it via Youtube and the claim is cleared = he gets all the ad revenue.

Ad revenue goes to author of music ONLY if client does not have a proper license. So only pirates are monetized (besides clients who doesn’t care to upload a license after the claim).

Without CID whole social media would be a pirate bay of music.

You can read about it here: The AJ Community Guide #3: Content Identification (CID) - #2 by RedOctopus