Using music on Youtube videos should not be arbitrary, creator content is now starting to be able to distinguish which music is free to use and which music cannot be used. But did you know that humming or humming a song on Youtube can also be copyrighted?
Know whistling or humming? Yup! Even if you don't pronounce the lyrics, if you put out a tone that matches a song then the video is vulnerable to being subject to copyright by the song owner. Not only humming, but whistling can also be subject to copyright infringement.
For example, when you are chatting or doing a podcast, you suddenly think of Adele's song, then you hum like ... "Hmm .. hmm .. hmm .. hhhmmmmmmm ...." Well, this part of you humming or whistling can be claimed by the copyright owner of the song (usually the label).
Really, is that only subject to copyright ???
Can you get copyrighted humming on YouTube?
Yup! 'That's all' on monetized YouTube videos can be subject to copyright and YouTube also confirms the correctness of this information through Q&A which they officially release at the following link:
In the Q&A list or questions and answers about copyright, there are specific questions about humming (more or less) like this:
Can copyright claims be subject to copyright claims being humming (humming without lyrics) or whistling on YouTube videos?
In the answer, Google explained that there are 2 parts of copyrights in music. Most people only know that music is copyrighted by the original singer/band. But there is a second type of copyright, namely for lyrics and melodies (composition or broadcast rights).
Google then continued, when we sing, hum (humming), or whistle part or all of a song either with our own voice or an instrument, even though we do it in a different way (original), but use a melody or lyrics that are already copyrighted (copyrighted) then you may get a (copyright) claim.
There are 2 distinct copyrights in music. Most people are familiar with the one for the artist or band who recorded the song. But there is a second set of copyrights for the lyrics and melody (also known as the composition or publishing rights). When you sing, hum, or play all or some of the song on an instrument, even if you do it in an entirely original way, you are using the copyrighted melody and / or words and may receive a claim. On YouTube, most composition claims are eligible for revenue sharing for creators in the partner program. -Google
However, Google also continues that there is still an opportunity for content creators to still get paid for the videos they upload on YouTube, namely by means of revenue-sharing.
Revenue sharing or the general term is profit sharing, it seems that it is still considered a middle way for creators and song license owners to both still benefit. However, this seems less satisfying, especially for content creators.
Isn't there a better solution?
Especially for this question, it seems that a new discussion has to be made, but if you have free time and really want to find out more about the copyright rules on YouTube, which seem to have many shortcomings, I suggest you watch the YouTube video made by Tom Scott.
In the video entitled "YouTube's Copyright System Isn't Broken. The World's Is." Tom explained quite nicely why the copyright system on Youtube now seems to have so many flaws.
In the 42-minute video, Tom Scott also explains who is involved in making this copyright regulation, not only on Youtube but in the world at large.
So in fact, the current rules on Youtube are not much different from the copyright regulations in the world today.
One statement from Tom Scott that I think should be underlined is about the expiration of the copyright of music or art. Tom argues that the copyright expiration time for music is too long, which affects the current system and implementation of copyright regulations.
What do you think about the copyright rules on Youtube? Is it fair to all parties? or there is still much that needs to be addressed? Hopefully, this article is useful. Remain a wise user! #beWiseUser!