Facebook Muting

To many ads? Support ODJT and see no ads!

BlueLineDJ

DJ Extraordinaire
Jan 25, 2015
1,248
1,657
So every year I DJ a local fundraiser that is a lip sync battle. I provide the music and various groups get together and perform. They are video'd and then published to Facebook. Of course Facebook will sometimes mute the audio due to "copyright" jargon. This is a non-profit fundraiser for a local Autism shelter.
Is there a way around that? Does not the fee I pay for my music pool service give me the rights to play music publicly, or am I just out of luck and totally off track? TIA!
 
So every year I DJ a local fundraiser that is a lip sync battle. I provide the music and various groups get together and perform. They are video'd and then published to Facebook. Of course Facebook will sometimes mute the audio due to "copyright" jargon. This is a non-profit fundraiser for a local Autism shelter.
Is there a way around that? Does not the fee I pay for my music pool service give me the rights to play music publicly, or am I just out of luck and totally off track? TIA!

Mine does but I'm using a Canadian service in Canada. Facebook mutes my videos also and each time they do I fight it and win. it takes a month or more for each one. I had the same problem with Youtube. Seems they aren't in a hurry they caught one from 2012 or 13 the other day. I suspect it will end up the same as the others I fought
 
  • Like
Reactions: ittigger
Is there a way around that?

There isn't. Facebook doesn't have the rights to broadcast copyrighted music, and they're not about to start paying for those rights.

Does not the fee I pay for my music pool service give me the rights to play music publicly, or am I just out of luck and totally off track?

It gives you the rights to play the music in public venues, but not the rights to stream or broadcast it online.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ittigger and djrox
Does not the fee I pay for my music pool service give me the rights to play music publicly, or am I just out of luck and totally off track? TIA!

This is my opinion. In the USA, paying for a record pool doesn’t give you any rights or license. A venue needs to obtain a license to play music publicly. The source of the music, or who actually plays it, makes no difference.
It’s impossible for a dj to obtain a license to play music publicly. The licensing is Venue specific, not DJ or source specific.

I pay for a record pool because it gives me easier access to new music and edited versions. But I get no licensing or rights. Someone buying MP3’s from Amazon has the same rights as me.

I’m not a lawyer, but I do watch Law and Order:😁 and yea, I know cds and now mp3 vendors say something to the effect of “not for commercial use”. Many people misinterpret this, in my opinion. It simply means buying the song doesn’t mean you get all rights to it. Proper licensing still needs to be obtained if that song is going to be played publicly….or used in ANY other way besides personal listening.

I had a dj tell me I was completely wrong. He said he called a record pool and they told him that only music purchased from them could be played publicly😁 Sounds like an unbiased source😁
 
Last edited:
I got a message this morning that one of my videos was muted. I was at work and a bit busy I checked it about 20 mins later and it was showing content not available so I don't know if they deleted the video or backpeddled on the decision.
 
Listen to Scott Hana about the right to play being venue specific. Technically speaking, if you or the venue is not paying the royalties on the piece then you are not allowed to play it in a public venue.

Now, what is a public venue? That question allows the DJ to squeeze through the loop hole.

As stated, social media does not want to press the envelope. Additionally, they are private organizations subject to the copyright laws and their deep pockets could become very shallow if any artist wants to push it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DJ Bobcat
There isn't. Facebook doesn't have the rights to broadcast copyrighted music, and they're not about to start paying for those rights.
That's not what's happening in this instance.
The music is incidental and the Racebook user has every right not to have his post edited or muted.

If someone posts a video from a wedding reception or other social occasion there is no legal restriction on the music incidental to what is being recorded. This presumes of course, that the music itself is not the subject of the video or promotion. In other words, if you video your wife making breakfast - there is no legal restriction on whatever music happens to be playing in the background.

You cannot thus, post a promotional recording of yourself DJing directly to a Racebook audience - that's commercial use. Neither can a band post a video of themselves playing covers directly to a Racebook audience for a similar promotional purpose. Both of these uses or covers would require at least three licenses - including performance, use, and synchronization.

Copyright is a third party concern, so the Racebook and Newbtube algorithms may not be very complicated. I'm guessing they operate on how heavily weighted the music is in the overall soundtrack. You can test this by posting two versions of the same party video - one with just the loud karaoke singers, and the other with the music lowered behind a narration. My guess is the latter survives and the former is banned.
 
Last edited: