Bclassic " Classical Comeback" booty shaking ladies still dancing to Dvorak, RIAA update

This is just a heads up that the RIAA takedown notice kerfluffle has been sorted out, and honestly, it was just as simple as changing the music bed to another version of the "Dvořák - Symphony No. 9" used in the ad for B-classical music festival.

The previous version had 42,977 views on the waveya2011 Youtube channel and a whopping 3,471,206 views on Bclassic's own youtube channel, for those keeping score at home.

The music, initially correctly licensed by the ad agency, was a performance of Dvořák's Symphony No. 9.
The music on the clip now is another performance of Dvořák's Symphony No. 9.

I see that you're currently confused, dear reader. Don't be.

A few ticks of bad timing, such as our receipt of the notice from RIAA after work on a Friday, blew a really simple thing out of proportion, as I was not able to contact anyone, and sadly bedded for misunderstandings as we're all in different timezones too.

It was all a matter of changing the soundbed, which has 0% effect on the end creative result of the video, and we're happy to do so.

Luckily I caught up with someone at UMG directly today who greatly helped us untangle the confusion here.

On youtube the ad agency uploaded the clip with new sound, and so did the dancing crew waveya2011.

To be clear, the RIAA acted responsibly and used a legal tool they are provided at law, and did nothing wrong sending out that letter, which was the only thing they could do at the time.

We acted correctly by contacting the agency and asked for proof of their licensing of the song as well.
So, now the B-classical ad on Adland is all caught up and updated too.

The way youtube works though, the B-classic clip lost all of its previous view count, and since some short-sighted ad awards find these often faked numbers important, the ad agency DDB is understandably a little disappointed about that.

Meanwhile, the dancing ladies are being re-uploaded to youtube on other channels, where the channel users do not have the agencies permission and are putting ads in front, keeping the ad agency busy trying to flag that on youtube.

By "putting ads" I mean, people are monetising content that is not theirs to begin with. This happens pretty much at once if a clip you make gets any attention.
The ad is effectively 'pirated', to be used as a source of AdSense income for parties who have nothing to do with the creation of neither the film nor music.

This is like playing a game of digital whack-a-mole on youtube, and an utter waste of time that shouldn't be happening to creators and performers of music and film. Sad. Pathetic. Frustrating for everyone who play by the book. Like us.
 

Bclassic " Classical Comeback" (2014) 2:53 (Belgium)

src="adland.tv/rony-riaa-issues-adland-takedown-notice/1150455385">RIAA takedown notice kerfluffle has been sorted out, and honestly, it was just as simple as changing the music bed to another version of the "Dvořák - Symphony No. 9" used in the ad for B-classical music festival.

The previous version had 42,977 views on the waveya2011 Youtube channel and a whopping 3,471,206 views on Bclassic's own youtube channel, for those keeping score at home.

The music, initially correctly licensed by the ad agency, was a performance of Dvořák's Symphony No. 9.
The music on the clip now is another performance of Dvořák's Symphony No. 9.

I see that you're currently confused, dear reader. Don't be.

A few ticks of bad timing, such as our receipt of the notice from RIAA after work on a Friday, blew a really simple thing out of proportion, as I was not able to contact anyone, and sadly bedded for misunderstandings as we're all in different timezones too.

It was all a matter of changing the soundbed, which has 0% effect on the end creative result of the video, and we're happy to do so.

Luckily I caught up with someone at UMG directly today who greatly helped us untangle the confusion here.

On youtube the ad agency uploaded the clip with new sound, and so did the dancing crew waveya2011.

To be clear, the RIAA acted responsibly and used a legal tool they are provided at law, and did nothing wrong sending out that letter, which was the only thing they could do at the time.

We acted correctly by contacting the agency and asked for proof of their licensing of the song as well.
So, now the B-classical ad on Adland is all caught up and updated too.

The way youtube works though, the B-classic clip lost all of its previous view count, and since some short-sighted ad awards find these often faked numbers important, the ad agency DDB is understandably a little disappointed about that.

Meanwhile, the dancing ladies are being re-uploaded to youtube on other channels, where the channel users do not have the agencies permission and are putting ads in front, keeping the ad agency busy trying to flag that on youtube.

By "putting ads" I mean, people are monetising content that is not theirs to begin with. This happens pretty much at once if a clip you make gets any attention.
The ad is effectively 'pirated', to be used as a source of AdSense income for parties who have nothing to do with the creation of neither the film nor music.

This is like playing a game of digital whack-a-mole on youtube, and an utter waste of time that shouldn't be happening to creators and performers of music and film. Sad. Pathetic. Frustrating for everyone who play by the book. Like us.
 

Bclassic " Classical Comeback" (2014) 2:53 (Belgium)

src="adland.tv/classic-classical-comeback-2014-253-belgium">B-classical ad on Adland is all caught up and updated too.

The way youtube works though, the B-classic clip lost all of its previous view count, and since some short-sighted ad awards find these often faked numbers important, the ad agency DDB is understandably a little disappointed about that.

Meanwhile, the dancing ladies are being re-uploaded to youtube on other channels, where the channel users do not have the agencies permission and are putting ads in front, keeping the ad agency busy trying to flag that on youtube.

By "putting ads" I mean, people are monetising content that is not theirs to begin with. This happens pretty much at once if a clip you make gets any attention.
The ad is effectively 'pirated', to be used as a source of AdSense income for parties who have nothing to do with the creation of neither the film nor music.

This is like playing a game of digital whack-a-mole on youtube, and an utter waste of time that shouldn't be happening to creators and performers of music and film. Sad. Pathetic. Frustrating for everyone who play by the book. Like us.
 

Bclassic " Classical Comeback" (2014) 2:53 (Belgium)

src="adland.tv/rony-riaa-issues-adland-takedown-notice/1150455385">RIAA takedown notice kerfluffle has been sorted out, and honestly, it was just as simple as changing the music bed to another version of the "Dvořák - Symphony No. 9" used in the ad for B-classical music festival.

The previous version had 42,977 views on the waveya2011 Youtube channel and a whopping 3,471,206 views on Bclassic's own youtube channel, for those keeping score at home.

The music, initially correctly licensed by the ad agency, was a performance of Dvořák's Symphony No. 9.
The music on the clip now is another performance of Dvořák's Symphony No. 9.

I see that you're currently confused, dear reader. Don't be.

A few ticks of bad timing, such as our receipt of the notice from RIAA after work on a Friday, blew a really simple thing out of proportion, as I was not able to contact anyone, and sadly bedded for misunderstandings as we're all in different timezones too.

It was all a matter of changing the soundbed, which has 0% effect on the end creative result of the video, and we're happy to do so.

Luckily I caught up with someone at UMG directly today who greatly helped us untangle the confusion here.

On youtube the ad agency uploaded the clip with new sound, and so did the dancing crew waveya2011.

To be clear, the RIAA acted responsibly and used a legal tool they are provided at law, and did nothing wrong sending out that letter, which was the only thing they could do at the time.

We acted correctly by contacting the agency and asked for proof of their licensing of the song as well.
So, now the B-classical ad on Adland is all caught up and updated too.

The way youtube works though, the B-classic clip lost all of its previous view count, and since some short-sighted ad awards find these often faked numbers important, the ad agency DDB is understandably a little disappointed about that.

Meanwhile, the dancing ladies are being re-uploaded to youtube on other channels, where the channel users do not have the agencies permission and are putting ads in front, keeping the ad agency busy trying to flag that on youtube.

By "putting ads" I mean, people are monetising content that is not theirs to begin with. This happens pretty much at once if a clip you make gets any attention.
The ad is effectively 'pirated', to be used as a source of AdSense income for parties who have nothing to do with the creation of neither the film nor music.

This is like playing a game of digital whack-a-mole on youtube, and an utter waste of time that shouldn't be happening to creators and performers of music and film. Sad. Pathetic. Frustrating for everyone who play by the book. Like us.
 

Bclassic " Classical Comeback" (2014) 2:53 (Belgium)