Well I think I may get off of YouTube for most of my video work. While the exposure is top notch, they may have gotten too good at detecting minor copyright infringement for my taste. It's impressive, because technically I am breaking copyright and should be held accountable, but by the copyright owner, not the hosting service.
And I seriously doubt using a mash up of three tracks from no hit wonder late 90's nu-metal group Lifer was going to get me in any copyright trouble.
I uploaded my demo reel:
http://www.vimeo.com/4708628And within a minute (before I even finished writing the video information as it used the default name in the warning e-mail, not the one I gave it) they had flagged it for containing copywritten music. And indeed it does, it's a mash up of three different songs from Lifer, who while over the top in their embrace of nu-metal, is delightfully heavy. Regardless, the group released only one CD to piss poor critical reviews and little sales. So I thought it would be alright to tap some of that really heavy stuff for my reel, no harm no foul.
It isn't, I know this, but hey, everyone else uses copyrighted music in their reels so why not?
While YouTube got the owner wrong, it's not Warner Music Group, it's on Universal, they got it without a single mention of the tracks in the description, title, tags or even the video itself. I also edited the tracks, moving transitions around using snippets of three different tracks, it was still picked up someway, somehow, which is impressive.
Impressive if this was an accurate reading, but shitty if this thing just picked it up and flagged it without descrimination. Like I said, the tracks are heavily edited and don't sound much like their original recordings in terms of structure and they got the label wrong. Are they just flagging anything that sounds well produced? It'd be interesting to play with.
Pages: 
