Now I usually include a readme file where, among other informations, I explain the AdRev thing.
Personally, I don’t encourage this, simply because if AdRev decide to change the link or method to clearing claims at any stage, you’ll have to manually update every single readme file on your AJ items to include new instructions/links and wait for it to be approved. This is fine if you have smaller portfolios like we have, but imagine you had over 400 items, all with an outdated readme file..That’s a lot of work to deal with right there!
So I’d stick to just placing the instructions on your item pages for now.
One question. Can I copy and paste your ‘advice’ on my items’ pages? Or is it copirighted ? I ask this because my english is not very good and you explain it in a very clear and simple way..
Of course you can I’ve explained it in pretty much ‘plain English’ to make it understandable to most English speaking buyers. But remember, this isn’t an official Envato disclaimer, so it’s important to remember this, if it ever comes up in discussion with your buyers.
Thanks for the reply Matt.
My main concern really is how it affects the genuine user as of course, none of us want to annoy our clients.So how does it work for them? Do they just have ads appear on their video? Ads that they can choose to either ignore or dispute using their licenses for proof? I’d hate to think that their videos get blocked in some way. I’d imagine that if its just a case of banner ads appearing, most users might just think that was YuoTube/AdRev and totally separate to AudioJungle. I’m interested to know the process for legit users. Also, can I ask you, do you wait for the clients to stop the ads or e-mail you or do you put a stop on the ads yourself? It’s so tempting to just leave them to generate money and then wait for a response as really we don’t know who is legit and who isn’t really do we?
Ok, so as soon as your (AdRev tracked) music is uploaded by someone to YouTube, they’ll receive a ‘matched third party content’ notice on their video. This is regardless if they purchased a license or stole it, or whatever. The only way their videos can get blocked is if YOU, the copyright holder, action a video takedown on their video with YouTube. So nothing to worry about there. Ads will automatically run on their videos and the only way these can be removed is if the user submits a dispute, armed with their License Certificate.
They do this by visiting adrev.net/contact-us, enter their video link and copy/paste in their License Certificate into the message box. Done. Claim cleared and continue as normal. (I suppose it’s a similar process to when we purchase music libraries/software and enter a license code).
Btw, referring back to an earlier post I made, we can let them know about this beforehand via our item pages, as seen in my example below. Then, if anyone should kick up a fuss, it could always be mentioned to them that this information was presented to them when they purchased the track in the first place. Remember, it’s the buyer’s responsibility to know exactly what they’re buying (as in life I guess!).
And to answer your last question, I always let the buyer make the initial attempt to clear claims.
Only if they contact me, I’ll send them a link to the AdRev claim clearance page and explain to them to copy/paste in their license. If they’re really having difficulty for whatever reason, I’ll get their video link and do it by hand in my dashboard. But very important for you to let them do it first, as they will see how mind bogglingly simple it is to clear a claim. As a result, they always come back for more!
Also to go slightly off track, but on a psychological level, it gives the buyer a sense of satisfaction that their purchased License Certificate actually has a proper purpose, with a genuine outcome. It also shows that there’s more value to that little text file they can download, than meets the eye. Buyers also need to realise that purchasing royalty free music doesn’t mean it’s free from copyright scrutiny, out in the wild..and the whole point of Licenses is for this very reason!
do anybody know why Adrev need 4 month to find a videos. ? i make a test – upload a video with track that was submitted to adrev. and after 5 minutes, copyright notification is come, and say about 3rd Party content matching in video. So, video was found immediately, why this process take 4 month?
Once AdRev has fingerprinted your uploaded music, it will start tracking them almost immediately, which is why you saw the ‘matched third party content’ notice.
However, AdRev has around a 4 month delay to show the results in your dashboard as they need to collate all the video views and claim data which has to be sent to them from YouTube. Google/YouTube presumably send over all this information to them every few months, hence the delay.
OK, so after 4 months of waiting, finally AdRev found some of my tracks. It was great (and surprising) to see where my music was being used.
Now, up till this point, my philosophy with AdRev had always been “if the music doesn’t have the watermark on it then I must assume it is genuine”. With that thought in mind, I submitted all the videos into the “do not use ads on this video” option.
Overnight though, I had an epiphany. Don’t worry…I’m seeing a doctor soon! I remembered that one of the videos was playing my music, complete and in full quality, sans any dialogue or sound effects in their video. Of course, any Tom, Dick or Harriet (got to be PC :)) can now rip/record this track in full quality and use it somewhere else! From now on I’ll let AdRev do its thing and risk the wrath of some clients.So, what’s the answer to protect our music from piracy or is it just one of those impossible tasks?
Hi Gae, I’m glad this has come back up and your epiphany was actually the main reason why AdRev is so, so important to us!
Firstly, I think there may have been a little misunderstanding of how AdRev works (despite my many attempts on the forum to explain over the months!). AdRev does not determine the original source of the music. All it does is ‘hear’ it (watermarked or otherwise) and adds a claim to it, until the buyer uses their License Certificate to clear that claim and show that they are a genuine license holder. That’s basically how it works.
The moment our music goes live on the internet (in this case, purchasable on AudioJungle), our music is vulnerable to being copied, redistributed, reuploaded without consent, etc, etc. There is simply no way to get around this and unfortunately it happens more than we’d like to think.
I see YouTube users routinely ‘rip’ and reupload my music from other user’s videos, especially those that don’t contain any voiceovers, effects and so on. And low and behold, that user has just got themselves a nice, free, albeit illegally obtained, copy of my song on their video. And it goes on and on and on like that (snowball effect).
Now, the user will get a ‘matched third party content’ notice on their video, which has the name of the track and the composer. Genuine users, or those that didn’t realise they were being naughty, can use that information to track down the music on the internet to purchase a license from you to clear the claim if they so wish.
Other users (mostly those that hold the belief that all music in the world should be completely and utterly free :/) won’t bat an eyelid. Of course, you’ll then be remunerated for that usage. Sometimes they’re silly cat videos, shot with a shaky phone camera with about 5 views (they would never purchase an $18 license anyway) or they’re massively viral videos with 20 million views, yet the uploader still refuses to purchase an $18 license, thinking music should be free. You get paid for that illegitimate use, which works out as much, much more than $9 over time, believe me!
It all boils down to the fact that we simply can’t prevent unlicensed uses of our music on YouTube. Not a chance. But we can certainly use it to our advantage and still get paid for our hard work. AdRev is a wonderful tool in that equation.
I’ve lost a good 20 or so.
Maybe they’re just old or potentially fraudulent accounts Envato are shutting down or something like that?
Great stuff PZ, and interesting to see a bit of a switcheroo up at the top!
I never spent more than 3-4 hours on a RF track (including alot of procrastination) because you just cant be sure how much sales it will bring …
These days, I’m starting to agree more and more with this, especially considering the way the RF market seems to be heading.
My bestselling item was probably written, mixed, mastered and uploaded in around 2 hours. Probably the best 2 hours out of my life I’ve ever spent!
On the flip side, the ‘worst’ selling items in my global catalogue, I could easily spend 2 to 3 days working on and refining these, yet these pieces are unarguably more complex in nature. To see a few sales plop in here and there however, over quite a long period of time, is pretty deflating. Unfortunately, it doesn’t seem to make much business sense in the long run.
To me, this notion confirms that we need to ‘keep things simple’. I really do believe that the RF market is generally very different from other areas of music licensing and RF marketplace buyers are looking for exactly this: simplicity.
Ok I’ve created an account, and tomorrow I’ll upload my portfolio If I’ve understood correctly, I’ll have to wait a couple of months before I’ll be able to see where my music was used, and how much I’ve earned? Can anyone tell me a rough estimate of the earnings with AdRev if we consider I have a channel with 7000+ subs and I promote my work there? I’m sure some of those subs will steal the music when they see it’s non-watermarked lol
Hey Matt, according to the guys at AdRev, right now there’s around a 4 to 5 month delay before you’ll see any initial figures and view counts come through, viewable on your AdRev dashboard. Also, you can expect around $1 per 1000 video views that your music appears on and has a claim active on it.
I have the same doubt for clients who even after buying AudioJungle licenses…
And what are licenses for? For customers to show YouTube that they have the right to use the music on their videos.
By visiting a link that AdRev provide (that you can put in your item description), customers can easily clear the claim with their license (see my example here).
Composers can also add specific video links, via their AdRev dashboards, to prevent claims from appearing on certain videos, which composers can easily do if showcasing their music on various promotional channels.
ETA: Just got there before me Boldtrax!
AlumoAudio saidI don’t think that’s true, http://audiojungle.net/forums/thread/exclusive-author-we-can-use-our-music/146787
CyberwaveOrchestra saidThat’s right, when promoting and referring AJ exclusive music on external sites, a watermark must always be used. Non exclusive authors can promote and refer their music on external sites without a watermark.
I’m sure I’ve read somewhere that you can’t place non-watermarked version of the track somewhere and lead people to your audiojungle page. That’s some kind of violation of the terms. If you’re showing it non-watermarked for your own projects it can’t have connection with AJ.
Yep, looks like the rules have recently changed, as Mexikus initially pointed out in this thread.
Official staff answer from David here. So with that, as it’s no longer mandatory, looks like we certainly can promote our exclusive AJ material on YouTube, etc without a watermark.
And of course, if everyone can do that now, for heaven’s sake make sure you get your work/property fingerprinted.