Fair use.

For those of you who don't know, I have a Youtube channel on which I upload a lot of covers and such. As you may also know, Youtube likes taking down covers, lol. I haven't had any on my stuff taken down yet, but I'm bound to have a strike against me in the future. ...This is also a concern for KHV Chorus, I guess.

My question is whether or not covers fall under Fair use. Obviously the original songs aren't mine and I don't own them at all... But I'm also not claiming to.

Fair use seems to have a lot of gray areas that I would like clarification on. It seems there is a rift between people who believe that covering songs (singing songs originally by someone else, can also be an instrument cover, etcetc) is covered by fair use and that you're able to dispute a claim against you in this case and those who believe that it is not covered under fair use.

Something I read recently stated that it depends on what you're doing. So, for example, if I was parodying a song--that's under fair use. f I'm critiquing the original song, then it's covered under fair use. If I do something to transform the existing song and somehow make it my own, that's under fair use. However, if I don't do anything terribly dramatic to the original song and I just upload it with minor twinges, it's not under fair use.

...I don't know if anyone here would actually have an opinion or know more about this in detail, but my original question remains. Is it possible to dispute a copyright claim against you via Youtube under fair use? Is it okay to upload cover songs, under fair use? I'm asking out of ignorance. I'm not claiming to actually know anything, which is why I'm looking for opinions and information.

Here's some guy talking about it, who apparently successfully disputes the copyright claim by using the fair use argument.


Here's some video about Fair Use, and a PDF guide-book. ​

 

In my opinion, screw copyright laws as of their present state.

Its so ridiculous how **** big-name companies are over their ownership of media. If its just a clip of a movie, or a positive use of a song, I don't see at all how it could possibly damage their profit. In all probability, it would actually help their business, by promoting the media to more audiences. And its not like anybody using copyrighted movies, TV series, or music in an intelligible way is claiming ownership either.

If it were the use of a small group's works, or the works of an individual, ones who don't have millions of dollars in funds, then I can definitely see the need for protection, but its pathetic how we can't post music videos or covers on Youtube without companies trying to take them down because "OH NOEZ WE DUN GET MONEYZ"

To me, its just a greedy way to cut down on people's creativity in hopes of getting more money. But as of right now, it doesn't seem things will change anytime soon.

 

I'm with Hayabusa on this one. But to answer the question, yes it falls under fair use. Fair use is generally concerned with making sure it doesn't present the owner from getting money and covers do not.

 

If you're not making or going to make profit from copyrighted products then it should be free to use for personal or distributive needs.

If companies REALLY want to enforce the copyright and all that bull, then I'd expect every company to have the obligation to reply to every request for the use of their products in non profit capacities, which would be increasingly difficult and expensive.

It's just easier to regulate it into profit and non profit roles of the copyrighted materials, instead of the long arsed system in place which has too many loopholes and inconsistencies to constitute any sort of smoothness.

Enough things will always slip through the cracks, hopefully your stuff will Jayn, it's got the quality to be loved and protected by people.