![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Two of my older YouTube videos have been found to contain 3rd party copyright audio material. On one of the videos, YouTube has muted the audio. I'm not bothered by that; I was dancing to a CD, and the video ended up with most of 2 or 3 Howard Jones songs in it. It's reasonable the copyright holder might not want to allow that. It's a pity though; without the music, the emotion of the dance is lost. I hope they don't identify the music in any of my other videos.
On the other video, which contains Nirvana's Lake of Fire song, YouTube didn't mute it, but added an ad linking to Amazon where you can buy the MP3 of the song. Now that is neat and useful. I've sometimes watched a video with music in it, and wondered what the music was, and if there was a link right there where I could buy the song from, I might do that on occasion. That leaves me feeling good instead of slightly guilty and/or pitying the situation.
I wonder if some copyright owners choose to just have all their music muted, and some choose to instead have ads shown, or if other criteria is also used in the decisions, such as how much of the music is included, the quality of the audio, and/or how popular the video is.
On the other video, which contains Nirvana's Lake of Fire song, YouTube didn't mute it, but added an ad linking to Amazon where you can buy the MP3 of the song. Now that is neat and useful. I've sometimes watched a video with music in it, and wondered what the music was, and if there was a link right there where I could buy the song from, I might do that on occasion. That leaves me feeling good instead of slightly guilty and/or pitying the situation.
I wonder if some copyright owners choose to just have all their music muted, and some choose to instead have ads shown, or if other criteria is also used in the decisions, such as how much of the music is included, the quality of the audio, and/or how popular the video is.