[cbr]

This post seems pretty confused to me. The idea is that you tell YouTube "I own this, people can't use it without my permission, but I'm ok with it as long as you give me a cut of the ad revenue". But with CC-licensed music you have already given people that permission.

It sounds like the author wants to give people the right to use their music freely anywhere but YouTube, which CC and YouTube understandably don't support.

Disclaimer: I work for Google, on open source software that doesn't have anything to do with YouTube.

[eropple]

> But with CC-licensed music you have already given people that permission.

That's literally the opposite of true with -nc.

[cbr]

Let's take a specific scenario:

* Person A composes some music, releases it as CC-NC

* Person B uses that music as the background to a home video, uploads it to youtube

It seems like B is following the CC-NC license? So then A goes to YouTube and, via Content ID, says "I own the music B used in their video, they didn't have permission to use my music, but I'm willing to let them use it if you put ads on their video and give me a cut".

(Again, I do work for Google, on unrelated stuff.)

[eropple]

Person B in that case would be following the license, yes. Person C uses it as background music for an advertisement on YouTube in contravention of the license. That's the problem.