There were some conflicting answers on the topic of earning money from your AJ music outside of AJ. I have a simple plan and I’d love to know what’s possible and what is not I’d love to find a balance between creating stock music and actually releasing some stuff on spotify for people to stream and enjoy without having to license it. And It’s great that Envato alows that.
I’ve also noticed that you can distribute music with CD Baby, but you need to avoid theit sync licensing option Quote: ‘‘For example, you may use CD Baby to distribute your music for personal listening via iTunes, but you may not opt-in to the CD Baby PRO or CD Baby Sync Licensing services.’’
Isn’t CDBaby’s sync licensing an option that gets your music fingerprinted with YouTube’s content ID? Much like AdRev… I’ve seen people protecting their music here on AJ with CID fingerprinting. Why is it not allowed in this case? If a track from my AJ portfolio is also on Itunes and Spotify, and someone buys it for 1.99 and uses it in his YouTube video that’s illegal, and I can’t find out about it or make any profit out of it. What’s with that? I’ve read that you can make slight variations in your streaming track so that it differs from one on AJ, but what does that do for me if it’s not part of YT’s Content ID. I would never find all of the illegal uses.
Another thing, If I want to promote my track in a YouTube video, with the description leading to my Audio Jungle site where people can buy the license, and also with links to spotify etc. for personal listening. Am I allowed to at least change the name of the track to something less generic in the title of the video, and also on Spotify?
Is there someone here who dived into these waters and has more knowledge, I’d love to hear it!
I don’t have the answer but I’m following in case someone has it. I asked somewhere if we could promote our AJ items on YouTube without the watermark and I was told we can’t, some however do it so I’m very confused as well
Hoping somebody can explain that or link to a topic we might have missed.
Uploading on YouTube without the watermark should be fine, with one exception. If the track is currently on your Exclusive account, you can’t upload it as Creative Commons, as that would breach your exclusivity.
You can upload it and distribute it through cdbaby, change titles, anything as far as I know.
Content ID works via cdbaby but you would have to release all your tracks through their service which can become expensive. It’s therefor easier to upload your tracks to Identifyy or Adrev and in case it gets used they take a cut.
If you opt in to synch via cdbaby that would violate an exclusive account’s rules I guess.
Hi, do you have any news about what you asked for?
Becasue I’ve got a question which is connected to your topic.
Content ID is available now at most of music distibutors:
And that’s the question. If to register all the tracks with Identifyy, a content ID system that works perfectly, how to release music to Spotify then, because almost all distributors have their own content ID systems (and I actually think that they can work differently from Identifyy’s one, for example much less efficiently) and those who don’t have will have in the future, it’s just a matter of time, what to do in that case?
OK, thank you, I thought about it as well.
What you think guys about the efficiency of content ID services by Identifyy and distributors? I guess distributors only take care mostly of big artists and mostly for videos on their YouTube channel nets. Right or wrong?
For example, a distributor have their own Youtube channel net.
Let’s imagine a track has got a big popularity, the distributor puts it on their channel and it gets even more views and listens. They will put it there only if they have a Content ID control of this track. Otherwise they will not be able to monetise it fully. Am I right or wrong?
And let’s imagine next that they put it there anyways just to get money from youtube monetization. And in that case Identifyy will put its claim on this video on their channel. Will they be happy with that?
You can always whitelist your own channel with Identifyy so that you can monetize videos directly on YouTube If you meet the criteria of YouTube monetization of course
I already contacted my distributor and they told me they can opt-out tracks.
But this action can not be undone. They just remove the claim.
Actually I don’t understand why this can not be undone?
And while it is already seems like a decision, but if to think more strategically there will be no possibility to opt-in back in the future if you decide one day to change your content ID service for some reason.
May be there some distributors that are able to opt-in the tracks back?
I don’t think I understand your question well. You can whitelist your channel, your videos. I mean, from then on you can monetise in every way yourself so there’s not really a need to turn it back on?
Whitelisting is the possibility of Content ID services such as Identifyy, AdRev.
And distributors seem to work in some a bit different way. As far as I can tell from what the support of my distributor told me. They just remove the claim from the video on YouTube. And somewhy this action can not be undone. That means thay can not put a claim again, if you ask them.But I guess Content ID services can do this for you, if you whitelist a video or a channel, and then decide to “unwhitelist” it back.
Why you may need this possibility in future can be clearly seen in the situation with AdRev - a lot of authors left AdRev and were to find a new Content ID service instead because of the fact AdRev stopped claiming and searching new videos for authors. So, if one day you decide that you want use Content ID service of your distributor by which you had put your tracks to streaming services (because its service works best at the moment, let’s just imagine this for example) you may need to do it. So, that’s why I’m asking if other distributors can opt-out and opt-in back by request.
Yes, in the case of Identifyy, they ask you to commit 1 year I think. So probably all distributors have periods set for this. It makes sense, else the whole thing would end up in chaos.
Which one is it?
I once switched between distributors and years later some content id money still comes in with the old one. I guess they don’t want to deal with it all the time, maybe Youtube even has policies.
I would try to commit long term to these things or don’t put them in effect at all. For example, when I have a track that still could go in different directions, I keep it from registering with content ID.
Of course everyone would like to have it long term going, me is not an exception.
But lots of authors and I was among them already experienced a real situation with AdRev, when you put your tracks there consistently and do all the work that depends on you, and hope for the long term result, but someday it turns out that the other part (AdRev) has different plans and situation which results in actually no results in the long run.
To my mind, there is no any insurance from such situations except having a possibility to change Content ID service when you need it, if you feel that things went wrong or something else, at least until all this entire system gets developed to something more predictable and controllable in the future.
I’d love to find a balance between creating stock music and actually releasing some stuff on spotify for people to stream and enjoy without having to license it. And It’s great that Envato alows that.
