<http://schema.org/articleBody>
"Proactive copyright protection systems like YouTube\u2019s ContentID are double-edged swords. On the one hand, they help large companies efficiently ensure that their copyrights are not infringed, which can be difficult with sites where anyone can upload content. On the other hand, they can give those with the right deals and connections unfair influence, are open to abuse, and can lead to some unfortunate and frustrating situations for fans and independent artists.\r\n\r\nWith Universal Music Group\u2019s recent YouTube takedown of a song by After The Smoke, it seems to be all of the above. The Florida rap group, who are not signed to a label, uploaded their song \u201COne in a Million\u201D to YouTube, only to have it taken down by UMG hours later for copyright infringement. Confused, After the Smoke tried to figure out from YouTube what was going on. They \u201Cwent through the all the correct procedures\u201D with YouTube, as member Whuzi tells VICE, and were told that the copyright for their song was owned by UMG. \u201CI filed a dispute and got a message back saying that, basically, we were lying and that Universal owned it, without any proof,\u201D he explains, \u201CIt\u2019s pretty much their word over ours.\u201D\r\nWhat happened\r\nApparently, here\u2019s what happened: After the Smoke wrote and recorded a beat and were trying to sell it to another artist, which is not uncommon. Yelawolf was interested and recorded a song with it, but was then signed to a subsidiary of UMG, and nothing came of the track (and the beat was never paid for). So After the Smoke used the beat in their own song, the aforementioned \u201COne in a Million.\u201D\r\n\r\nWhile Yelawolf\u2019s track was never officially released, it was leaked (without any credit to After the Smoke), and UMG apparently had it taken down. When After the Smoke uploaded their track with the same beat, the beat they wrote and own, YouTube\u2019s automated system recognized it and removed the video, telling them that it was infringing on UMG\u2019s copyright.\r\nAbuse, not enforcement\r\n\u201CThis is really quite an amazing form of copyright abuse when you think about it,\u201D writes Mike Masnick at Techdirt, \u201CUMG artist fails to license beat on a song that is leaked\u2026 and then UMG claims copyright over the official song over the same beat.\u201D As Whuzi put it to VICE, \u201CWe\u2019re independent artists with our own copyrighted material and we\u2019re being accused of infringing on their artist just because they\u2019re on Universal.\u201D A system where UMG doesn\u2019t even need to own the copyright to content for it to be added to YouTube\u2019s content matching system is ripe for abuse, as this and last year\u2019s take down of Megaupload\u2019s \u201CMega Song\u201D demonstrate. YouTube denied that its partners can take down videos they don\u2019t own the rights to, but this latest take down seems to contradict that.\r\n\r\nFortunately, UMG retracted its claim over the video, so After the Smoke can now treat their own music like it\u2019s really their own. But it took the support of their fans, \u201Cback and forth with the right people, and some advice from lawyers.\u201D Whuzi told VICE, \u201Cif it wasn\u2019t for our fanbase getting riled up about it, I think this would have been swept under the rug.\u201D\r\n\r\nUnsurprisingly, Whuzi says he wouldn\u2019t accept a record deal from UMG even if it was offered. \u201CWe\u2019re not even Universal artists and they think they can push us around,\u201D he said, \u201Cimagine what they\u2019d be doing to us if we were actually signed to them.\u201D\r\nA larger problem\r\nAlong with some important questions about how YouTube\u2019s Content Management System works, this story highlights a significant problem with much of the copyright systems and suggestions proposed by those like UMG: often, they\u2019re good for large companies more than they\u2019re good for artists overall. It shouldn\u2019t take an uproar from artists and their fans for a system to work as intended."^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string>
<http://thenextweb.com/insider/2012/01/28/universal-music-group-youtube-copyright-enforcement-gone-wrong/>