Is this practice allowed?

Are AJ reviewers permitting authors to upload the same track but with just a single note changed (not even the note but the note’s position)? Recently, while browsing through the electronica genre, I’ve discovered this practice which is a little offending. If you’d like an example go through the new electronica items approved today and you’ll see what I’m talking about (different profiles here). This is the newest example but there are so many lately…where an author uploads the same track but with minimal changes (a note, the key but the same melody, a note’s position etc). I think it’s just not fair to others.


I dont think it is allowed… I think reviewers just can’t technically track all this cheaters. If they could then probably review time was months. But this cheaters should be banned in my opinion. They just foul AJ spamming with that identical tracks day by day. And yeah, it is really unfair to the other honest authors who are trying to do something unique and spends much more time to do that instead of just rendering another similar track from the template after changing few notes.
…Also I can imagine “delight” of the buyers who has to listen dozens of this clones :grin:


Just take a look at the waveforms and compare the shape - instrumentation and arrangement. Hilarious. :slight_smile:


It never ceases to amaze me how creative some people can be when it comes to cheating. If they channelled half of that creativity into their music their lives would have been much better.


It would be nice if we get an official answer. In case of foul play, we can report such actions.

LOL 3tracks in a row and the waveforms even look the same, and one of them already got one sale :stuck_out_tongue:


It says in the author guide that you can have up to 3 variations of the same item. I guess the definition of variation is very loose? I saw the tracks OP mentioned, it is pretty crazy!

It would be nice to have some clarity of what is going on here. Does the variation rule apply here or are they breaking the rules?

3 maximum variations applies on 1 release / item. And that person made 3 variations in 3 different releases, even with different titles and accounts.


This is one way to get sales I guess - again…Hilarious.

So THIS is why AJ members have such a hard getting found. Can we have like some volunteer squad to find these spammers if AJ can’t do it? Because that’s messed up.


"Welcome to the jungle it gets worse here everyday
You learn to live like an animal in the jungle where we play
If you got a hunger for what you see you’ll take it eventually
You can have everything you want but you better not take it from me

In the jungle, welcome to the jungle
Watch it bring you to your sha na na na na knees knees"


This practise didn’t allowed. AJ can disable upload for account that do this.

But, uh… isn’t that how some elite authors have become elite? :wink:

In any case, this is ridiculous and reflects poorly on all of us. The different accounts there have different composer names, so there is definitely something shady going on. Buyers are being lied to, and this needs to be addressed.


Mulder and Scully have been notified…X-Files The Movie 3?


I’ve seen two authors do this practice recently, both with their most recent 2 items. Songs so identical that you could make a fade edit between them and not notice a change. I don’t understand how they are allowed to do this on two consecutive items without the reviewer noticing. They even name them virtually the same thing, changing just one word. I’m guilty of sticking to tried and tested formulas myself sometimes, but this is ridiculous.


There is no reason to be gentle to those kind of authors…a cheat is a cheat and should reported to stop that unfair practice.


On that note I would just like to say is it that note or the note before…I just get so mixed up and confused as these posts are just the same to me.

I think this practice is based on the fact that the reviewers cannot actually remember past tracks from someone they previously checked, more to say sometimes can be diff reviewers for tracks from the same author.

So they took advantage of this thing, it’s the same as hackers try to find “ways” to breach in.

So now, they have with only one track maybe 2-3 new uploads of “newest tracks”.

It’s same when you’re on a forum thread, and when someone just says “Up”, the thread goes up into being “active, with last post recently”.

well…these are not musicians, or members of a group of authors trying to stick together, they are
opportunists trying to make a lot of cash out of few tracks and go to Miami and party with the cash :slight_smile:

Being a musician involves a lot of talent, work and learning and working again etc…

I personally think that Envato should have a “police team” sort-of, on Audiojungle, like a crew of 6-7 members that constantly check stuff like that happening and giving penalties to people. The market is very big now and things should be regulated.

Penalties can be from not uploading for 2 weeks, 1 month or 2 months to blocking the account indefinitely if they repeat this offensive (for the other authors) practice. It’s sad to see nowadays people still just don’t like to play it fair and we still need to enforce rules in places where there’s so much creativity and friendship going on.


What you say is spot on @SoundLoungeStudio. I would really like to know if these actions can be reported by other authors. I mean what is Envato’s point of view on this? Is this acceptable or not? I, personally, wouldn’t want to write a ticket to support before I know for sure that this is not allowed. Again, if this is wrong, authors can report (because who listens more music on AJ than us, authors) and I believe the efficiency would be really good. The matter has been discussed, I believe, a few mounths ago too, but it remained unsolved.

Obviously close down all three accounts right away.

1 Like