@emmrecs

Hi Jeff,

Yes, I would expect so. I would hope that it also applies to those who renew a subscription. Of course that would mean that a current subscription was ending. Magix should clarify this.

I would expect some complaints from current subscribers.

Also, I would like a clarification of the following:

With a subscription, you can also access free sound effects and royalty-free music. You can also discover the diverse collection of songs available in the integrated in-app Store.

Does "discover" mean that you can also use them? And what is the difference between "royalty-free music" and "songs?"

By "access free sound effects and royalty-free music" I would presume that the "royalty-free music" is freely available. Or did they mean the "free sound effects AND the free royalty-free music?" Including "free sound effects" means nothing - they are already free, just as there are some free songs or music. Not really a selling point for the subscription. Also, all of the music and songs are royalty-free in any event. It's the use that governs and it should be stated that all is for non-commercial use. Or is it?

The license with VPX allows for commercial use of the content that comes with VPX. What is considered as not coming with VPX, the free sound effects and free music?

Semantics and the English language!

John CB

@emmrecs

Hi Jeff.

In the past, once, I used a track that came with VPX and uploaded it to YouTube. It resulted with a copyright strike against the video. Basically it means in that instance that should anyone see adverts when viewing my video the person / persons that have copyright over the music get all the payments that would have accrued from the advertising revenue. The alternatives at that point is to take down the video or replace the sound track or let the copyright strike stand and take the financial loss (should you be so lucky as to have an income from YouTube).

Depending on the copyright strike depends on whether the strike is just purely financial or whether you get done for using material that is not allowed under any circumstances. The latter being more serious and can result in a channel take down. I even know one person who got a copyright strike upheld against his own music because in the past he allowed an agency to distribute his work. That contract was dissolved but they still get the proceeds and not him.

Either way, I've given up using music from any online source or I cheat. 😉🤣🤞.

Ray.

@CubeAce

Hi Ray,

The music in question that Jeff replied to and the subject of this thread comes from Smartsound and not Magix. See the info on the Smartsound Cloud site for what to do in the event of a copyright strike.

Copyright strikes are always a possibility, but should not preclude us from using the content that we have the right to use. I really wish we wouldn't have to go through this discussion every time someone brings up something about using the content from Magix unrelated to copyright claims on YT.

So, O.T.:

As for getting a copyright claim or strike on YT using music supplied by VPX, you can and should contest it. Whoever uploaded it for YT Content ID has done so illegally (unless it's Magix) and is in breach of the terms of use licensed by Magix - no one gets exclusivity. In the few cases that I have had, I contested, indicating just that - they do not own the copyright and do not have exclusivity and are in breach of the terms of use of the music obtained from Magix. Not only should they remove the copyright claim, but they should remove the offending material from YT Content ID, failing which they could have their entire site frozen or cancelled by YT forfeiting any proceeds. I also add that since their work is monetized, they should be able to produce proof that they even have the commercial use license, failing which they would be in double breach. YT monitors contested copyright claims. More than several complaints about the same content and YT may get involved and take down the offending user/company channel (according to what YT indicates, buried away in their T's & C's.

Users on the Vegas site ganged up once and simply created quick and dirty videos using the same content and so advised the offending party upon getting a copyright claims. It wasn't long before the offending party reacted appropriately.

In the case that you mentioned, that would be a problem between the two parties, as the party that uploaded the music to Content ID seemed to have the right to do so.

John CB

@browj2

Hi John.

Try arguing with YouTube over copyright strikes as an individual is is tend amount to useless if you go against any type of agency claiming the copyright. The Vegas users collective effort seems a good idea but if a ruling goes against you it is your own channel that then becomes under threat so a lot of people don't contest such claims.

There are sites that provide royalty free and copyright free music and sound effects such as epidemicsound as well as YouTube's own sound library for both music and sound effects.

I'm just wondering how much real benefit the Magix offering has over other options.

Ray.

@CubeAce

Ray,

So far, I have been about 90% successful having copyright claims removed. The losses were iffy and not obvious. There is usually no problem with copyright claims (I should have been precise - claim, not strike) or contesting them and losing. Unless, of course, it is a real strike and the owner doesn't allow you to use the material. Otherwise, it just remains there. I have some with the indication:

The Content ID claim on your video doesn't affect your channel. This is not a copyright strike.

and the box:

Copyright claim

Copyright-protected content found. The owner allows the content to be used on YouTube.

These are the obvious ones and I can live with that or I'll change the material.

As for other sites that provide royalty free and copyright free music and sound effects such as epidemicsound, you can have exactly the same problem. Someone can have an agency upload their material containing that same music to YT Content ID and you'll get a copyright claim.

The Vegas case in point was about material obtained from Storyblocks - the very same Storyblocks available with a subscription to MS Suite or VPX14.

John CB