3 ms·
Nah, better to stick ads up front, send a little money to the copyright holder and pocket the rest. I mentioned in another comment also that you'd need to use t
by batch12 5y ago
Nah, better to stick ads up front, send a little money to the copyright holder and pocket the rest. I mentioned in another comment also that you'd need to use the song to make the pattern for the noise cancellation. So I wonder if the copyright holder could still claim usage and ask for a payout making that more expensive than just dropping.
- dredmorbius 5y agoPut this at the discretion of the uploader. Remove the allegedly infringing music, with a notice that audio has been filtered due to copyright claim, unless the uploader permits a revenue passthrough / share with the copyright claimant. (This still doesn't address the issue of erroneous claims, e.g., the Adam Neely / Kate Perry fraudulent claim, but it does mean that neither YT/Google nor the claimant automatically profit by the appropriation of another's work and audience-development.)