SoundCloud Copyright issues??

[Electric_Head]

Are the rest of you having any issues with the odd track being rejected when uploading to SC?
I had an incredibly obscure sample from Sepultura - Roots, which I tried to upload as part of a track.
I tried many different ways to upload the track but even once the sample was mangled beyond the original, SC still rejected the track.
It even went as far as telling me the Sample was licensed to Roadrunner records as Canyon Jam.
I was pretty speechless.

So, anyone else?

Anyone having issues uploading mixes?

[blinx]

i hear mixcloud will hassle you less, maybe time to jump ship.

[Eskimo]

Had the same issue, working on a tune remix and cant either upload the wip of it, and if u decide to upload to youtube beware the copyright there too

[Electric_Head]

the thing is I don`t understand how it picked up the issue.
I don`t even think Sepulture fans would have recognized it.
I mangled it heavily.

[Nokturn]

That's sort of a strange thing to hear really. I've used many samples in different songs and to be honest sometimes I leave them completely noticeable and have never been denied an upload due to copyright issues. A couple times I even used samples that were quite recognizable.

Now that I think about it, I read an article awhile back about Watermark Embedding for Audio Signals which would allow people to embed information for copyright protection into digital audio signals. It would then allow them to input a digital copyright into the actual recording of music without it affecting the sound what so ever.I didn't think much of it then, but if it's something that could actually be used it makes me wonder if places like soundcloud or youtube would be able to just scan audio as it's uploaded and pick up the digital signal and just deny the uploads on the spot. Of course, this would mean that the digital copyright signal would have to carry over with the sample and not be destroyed no matter how much you change the sound of the sample. It's definitely an interesting turn in how people will sample if this is something that is viable and starts being a standard.

I can't find the original article I read about it on, but I did find this which is the same thing, just this one is actually being marketed so it seems to be in use.

http://www.musictrace.de/products/contentmark.en.htm

[Electric_Head]

surely that`s newer than 1993 or whenever the sample is from

[Nokturn]

surely that`s newer than 1993 or whenever the sample is from

Well actually, a form of it was patented back in the 90s for images. although, after reading that it says that as it is right now it has to be done during the actual production of the track, it can't just be added to any recording you happen to have. But yea, it's probably not the case with your sample, although it's interesting that you are getting hit with it no matter what you do to the sample. You should try removing the sample completely and uploading it to see if it still gets denied. It's possible they just flagged it and now any time you try to upload anything with the name will just get denied automatically.

[Electric_Head]

that`s just it, it`s the tune in my sig.
uploaded the moment I removed the sample
wierd wierd wierd
I mean considering I have another track up where I used White Zombie samples but yet they got through
I even used some Mars Volta along the way,
Granted, everything is mangled beyond notice.

It`s such a good sample too

[Lichee]

I wish there was an alternative to soundcloud, it's compressed the shit out of my new tune

[bassinine]

that's happened to me on soundcloud with a 100% original tune.

[valet]

same thing happened to me last night. i made a mashup of Feed Me's "Cloud Burn" and B.o.B's new hit "Strange Clouds" and SC just kept rejecting it.

[makemerich]

If the case is a digital water mark, record the track as audio with a physical interface.

[ketamine]

I wish there was an alternative to soundcloud

HERETIC