Lawyer Reacts To Wings Of Pegasus - THIS is the BIGGEST musical fraud I've EVER seen.

[@TopMusicAttorney]

What should I react to next? Wings Of Pegasus Original Video: kzbin.info/www/bejne/jn_YpoKIot-Ima8 🟡 Become your Own Record Label: www.topmusicattorney.com/becomeyourownrecordlabel 🟢 Free Split Sheet Template: www.topmusicattorney.com/splitsheet 📄 Music Contracts Templates: www.topmusicattorney.com/music-contracts 📺 Get Your Music Into Tv/Film/Games: www.topmusicattorney.com/sync 💻 #1 Resource For Artists And Producers: www.topmusicattorney.com ⚖ Hire An Attorney: www.delgadoentertainmentlaw.com 📰 Get My Newsletter: www.topmusicattorney.com/newsletter/ 🎧 Listen To The TMA Podcast On All Streaming: www.topmusicattorney.com/podcast 🟢 Free Stuff: www.topmusicattorney.com/free-stuff

[@RealHomeRecording]

KZbin is full of "stitch-style" videos and it really is annoying. Take a look at the guy Benny Johnson as an example. Their algorithm works in favor of channels that show multiple faces/voices and therefore reaction style content gets put above completely original content. Plus, piggybacking off multi-million dollar marketed music is much easier than releasing originals for obvious reasons. It'd be nice if KZbin helped promote some talented undiscovered musicians' music videos, but that's asking for too much and probably against their unofficial agreements with the major record labels.

[@Crosshatch1212]

The veiws are terrible on that ch 😂😂

[@AroundTheWay_Jay]

You mean musically

[@TeraByteify]

KUJO BEAT DOWN!!!!

[@stacey37m]

Well as you're going around my favorite channels just keep Going I will no doubt meet you again on another channel I like

[@tnmoppylaura5476]

The Wings of Pegasus fellow is Fil Henley from Maidenhead England. He’s an excellent teacher, performer and songwriter. He’s got over 400k subscribers. Been following him for years.

[@808v1]

I as well.

[@grimmertwin2148]

I thought he was in Oasis? Gotcha lol

[@melvynobrien6193]

@@grimmertwin2148 Got me!

[@Angela-fp6ch]

He's great and so intelligent and fair!been following for years as well!

[@SlickArmor]

Same. Been watching Fil for years. I like his auto tune breakdowns.

[@robertdillon9989]

He did not say it was illegal to do cover songs. Everybody does cover songs. He actually does cover songs in his videos. He said it’s illegal to actually take someone else’s recording and superimpose your face over it like Milli Vanilli.

[@phrygd]

He did say that, but he also claimed that a cover artist can’t claim their cover as an original song. It sounds like you can, in fact, claim your cover as your original work but must also declare that the underlying composition is not yours.

[@JoriDiculous]

@@phrygd As long as you dont pay royalties to the original artist. Its same deal if you sample a song and use it in you Own song and dont "ask for permission"; you are breaking the law.

[@vanhetgoor]

If that so called Top Music Attorney paid any attention we wouldn't have been bothered with bull. What is the use of an attorney that does not listen properly (the question is rhetorical, no need to answer)

[@tgriffin8179]

@@phrygdwell said - these are lip syncs of the artist…. These are not covers, they are shallow fakes.

[@just4music687]

@@tgriffin8179 Exactly!!

[@melvynobrien6193]

It's not Vanny singing, it's Celine Dion. It's not a cover, it's theft.

[@DMSG1981]

Well, it's Celine Dion singing, so it is a cover, because the original is by Jennifer Rush.

[@moorek1967]

@@DMSG1981 It doesn't matter if he says the lyrics in sign language or Igbo or any other language, what the "performer" is doing, is making a greenscreen video of themselves lip-syncing and then titling it as though it was them performing on the talent show. And Celine's record producers bought the rights, so even if she is doing the cover, the record company has the permission because they now own the song. Artists very rarely themselves buy rights, their recording company does.

[@dancalkins97]

The accent screams southeast Asian, and Vanny is Indonesian. It's her.

[@ghetifal]

It is Vanny singing. Fil was wrong. I'm a Fil fan. He often does objective work that debunks cult-like loyalty to artists who claim they are not pitch correcting. In this case, he made a mistake which has been debunked, but now ironically his fans have a cult-like loyalty to ignore the plain observable reality. In any case, the person making the video HAS ripped someone off, by lip syncing their recording, its just that its Vanny, and not Celine. They are trying to pass it off as Celine since Celine is more well known. They were also more likely to get caught for infringement since Celine's label probably monitors for infringement more proactively than Vanny can.

[@stpfs9281]

@@ghetifal Did you listen to the whole episode?

[@NeilmacRory]

He didn’t say covers are illegal, he said theft of someone else’s work, and claiming it as your own is.

[@headerahelix]

He doesn't understand they are covers to begin with. He thinks these are the original songs under a new name, which they are not. If you bothered to watch the video she makes it extremely easy to understand that Vanny is a legitimate cover artist, as are the other performers that the channels he criticises stole from. The cover artists aren't doing anything illegal, the channels stealing their covers and the X Factor etc footage arguably are.

[@ronanzann4851]

What the hell are you talking about ? That jack-ass holding the baby and "pretending" to sing is claiming that THAT IS HIS VOICE ! And those were NOT covers, the ones he was miming to were the originals !

[@RajitSunderani-k8w]

no, youre wrong

[@vernonfrance2974]

@@headerahelix It is not right to impersonate some one else's voice and not inform us that's what they're doing. In this case it is the voice of Bobby Hatfield of the Righteous Brothers who actually made this most famous rendition of the song, "Unchained Melody." Yet the person in the video is NOT Bobby Hatfield.

[@KarstenJohansson]

@@headerahelix I think he was differentiating the legal version of a cover, and this version of a cover that doesn't get royalties to the actual copyright owners.

[@Stuski666]

One of Fil's points is that the "performers" are mostly miming/ lip-synching to the original artist, they are NOT performing covers. That can't be legit

[@orlock20]

Not only that, they are renaming other people's projects under other names and then claiming it as their own. For instance somebody taking Stairway to Heaven by Led Zeppelin, relabeling the file as Fancy Pants and then claiming that the person is "singing" the "original" song Fancy Pants and not miming Stairway to Heaven.

[@kirkwilson6229]

That is correct. This isn't about "covers".

[@ziggarillo]

They're not " cover songs " obviously pointless watching the rest of this video if you don't understand that much.

[@poulwinther]

Even if they were capable of doing real covers, they must list the actual owner of the work, for the revenue stream to automatically go there. I'm really surprised Krystle is not mentioning that.

[@TheEudaemonicPlague]

@@ziggarillo Your comment sounds very much like you think OP said something wrong/inaccurate. Since OP was correct, then this comes off as a really stupid attack on them. Yeah, everyone gets it; they aren't covers...your arrogance makes you seem rather dim, pointing out what is not only obvious, but actually stated clearly multiple times. Have a nice day, Captain Obvious.

[@JayKughan]

I think you completely missed his point about Vanny. She NEVER covered the song. She literally used Celine Dion's original studio recording in her video.

[@AlanTov]

I think it's a bit more complex than that. She did do a cover and register it. But this video is Celine's voice and the revenue is being channeled as if it's the cover. My understanding of what wings of Pegasus is saying.

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

I compared them (on Spotify) and no, they're not the same. And she does give proper credit to the original songwriter for the mechanical licensing. If Content ID is misidentifying the Celine Dion audio for Vanny (edit: not it's not, the audio is Vanny, not Celine), then that's on KZbin, not the artists or even the video uploader. But if it's actually Vanny's audio, then there's no problem with that, both she and the original songwriter get paid which is appropriate. The only real problem with the videos that I see is misappropriation of TV show footage they don't have the rights to use and pasting themselves into it with insufficient notice that they weren't actually on the show, as well as falsely claiming that it's sung by Celine when it's actually sung by Vanny.

[@hostile177]

@@JayKughan The exact reason I came here.

[@FD2003Abc]

@@ModusVivendiMedia What app did you use to do the comparison?

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

@@FD2003Abc My ears. They sound NOTHING alike in any way. The accompanying instruments are completely different, the balance is different, the tonality of the voice is different, the inflections and vibrato and phrasing are different, it's even at a different pitch. Even the spoken accent the lyrics are pronounced in is different - Celine Dion has a French Canadian accent, and Vanny Viabola does not.

[@henryrolfe9653]

How come everybody here was able to understand what he was saying, but the lawyer wasn't? Time for a new career?

[@ghetifal]

Because what he was saying was wrong, and all his fans are mindlessly defending it, and she was right. I thought she was wrong at first, too. I'm a Fil fan and thought the lawyer was way off. But then I went and listened to the Vanny and Celine versions. It is so obvious that it is a different version that one would have to be tone deaf to not hear the differences.

[@nealm6764]

"Lawyer" I would love to see a list of cases she was primary on.

[@celineyeo5788]

@@ghetifal wg3u5445

[@inTruthbyGrace]

@@nealm6764 "sycophant". Start there.

[@honeychilerider]

@@nealm6764 I don't think she's a trial attorney. Though she may be. But there are lots of other kinds of lawyers. One of my closest friends is a big International Law attorney, lectures all over Europe and the US as well as brokering deals and mergers and all that stuff... never goes to court. Like never.

[@whatsername123]

Pretty sure it's not a cover when you use the artists original music?

[@gregaiken1725]

correct. its not a 'cover'. its republishing copyright protected content, without the signed agreement of the original copyright holder.

[@whatsername123]

@@gregaiken1725 yep. And if the music and lyrics rights are held by different artists/ writers/label, it's seperate rights you have to apply for. Unless that's changed in the last couple years?

[@whatsername123]

@@gregaiken1725 If I'm remembering correctly, you can't even use something made into an original sample if it's recognizable as the original song? Been a while

[@SuperStrik9]

@@whatsername123 Whenever I hear the word samples I always think of the Beastie Boys album Paul's Boutique. There are a crazy number of samples on that album. 105 songs were sampled including 24 on one song alone, the 12 minute plus B-Boy Bouillabaisse.

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

But Vanny's music IS a cover - on Spotify the audio is clearly different from Celine Dion's, and she properly credits the original songwriters for mechanical licensing purposes. If in the video it's Celine Dion's audio (edit: it's not, it's Vanny's), then the problem is Content ID misidentifying the audio, something that's on KZbin, not the fault of any of the artists of the video uploader. But I suspect people are just not realizing that it's Vanny's audio and not Celine Dion's, since both are very good. The only real problem with the videos that I see is misappropriation of TV show footage they don't have the rights to use and pasting themselves into it with insufficient notice that they weren't actually on the show, as well as falsely claiming in the title and description that it's Celine when it's really Vanny.

[@SilentNoMore]

17:40 I'm confused... I think the problem is SHE didn't sing it but Lip Synced/Mimed the song, so the music $ should go to Celine etc, not the person pretending to be on whatever show.

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

That's what Fil is falsely claiming, and most people here are mistakenly assuming, but it's not true. The song in the video is a completely different cover that sounds nothing at all like Celine Dion's cover of the same song, other than that they're both very good.

[@regularperson4106]

If its so bad then why don't celine dion and her team do something about it????? if they don't, then its ok! Its up to the artist to actively activate the copyright, if he/she don't then thats a green light for other people to use their stuff. Its celine dion's fault not the other cover singers!

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

@@regularperson4106 I wouldn't go so far as to say that a copyright holder failing to defend their copyright is a "green light" - a copyright violation is still technically illegal whether a complaint is filed or not - but you're right that it's up to the copyright owner to make a complaint, not us. (Most copyright violations are civil violations which requires that the person suing has standing to do so, which the copyright owner does but we do not.) But the real point is that Celine Dion, who also only sang covers of these songs (she didn't write any of her own music), has NO CLAIM over someone else's cover of the same songs. The SONGWRITER has a claim to royalties from all covers of that song (for the songwriting portion, but not for the performance / audio recording portion, as these are TWO SEPARATE COPYRIGHTS), and a basis to complain if the cover did not credit them such that they can get paid. But Vanny Vabiola's covers all DO credit the original songwriters in the same way that Celine Dion's covers also do (in a way that ensures that the songwriting royalties for plays of those tracks will be split off for that songwriter's publisher, since this is metadata submitted to streaming platforms via a distributor, not just some words in a KZbin video's description). So she has done nothing wrong. Ceilne Dion is not owed any money for Vanny Vabiola's covers of those songs (and nor is Vanny Vabiola owed any money from Celine Dion's covers of the same songs - which sounds more ridiculous when you put it that way, but the two hypotheticals are actually identical). Jennifer Rush's publisher (and Jon Bongiovi's and Richard Sambora's publisher, for the other track) ARE owed royalties since they wrote the songs - royalties which are already being paid, so they have no reason to complain, and no legal basis to do so, since making a cover version of a song is allowed under copyright law and does not need advance permission from the songwriter. So long as royalties for a "mechanical license" are paid, which streaming platforms do pay based on the "songwriter" field in the track's metadata, then the law is complied with.

[@SilentNoMore]

@@regularperson4106 You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. Big stars like Celine don't scroll the internet for copyright. Companies actually do that for musicians/singers. "If they don't then it's ok!" That in itself doesn't mean the law wasn't broken... You might wanna learn Copyright Law before proving your ignorance about such things.

[@whatsername123]

Fun fact: Fil (who's awesome by the way) actually had one of his own videos, of himself talking on his channel, (nothing else), blocked(might have been a strike) , but yet these idiots get away with ripping off entire songs and shows.

[@Cheepchipsable]

He should have another go, this time with his pants on...

[@whatsername123]

​@@Cheepchipsable😂I would love to believe that's the case, just for my own entertainment.

[@evilgremlin]

This pass because no one would bother to sue them in their home country on the other side of the world. Where judges might toss lawsuit just because it's some filthy foreigners suing our good local boys, or even proceed and rule fully in favor of local copyright violator. Even without bribes.

[@Maikeru110572]

Yeah, happens to Rick Beato's channel a lot too.

[@SuziQ.]

I saw what happened to Fil. He played one of his original songs. The company that tracks his music blocked the video. It was reversed. Oh, I think I know what you mean. That was more recent, and KZbin objected to too much Fil in one of Fil’s videos. I guess he broke the 8 second rule.

[@camillasaietz4856]

They are not singing their own version of the songs nor are they miming to a cover version. They are miming to the ORIGINAL version from the ORIGINAL artist.

[@jessicamacallister9272]

Honestly I can't with this anymore. You don't understand what Fil has said at all.

[@Isa_barchetta]

Me too, im confused, what Kind of lawyer doesnt get the Point of Fil' s Video... 😂

[@jessicamacallister9272]

@@Isa_barchetta It's like Fil brought her to water and instead she managed to drown in it. I barely made it half way before I had a massive headache and had to stop watching.

[@Isa_barchetta]

@@jessicamacallister9272 🤣🤣🤣 very well said, i felt Like you, it stressed me out. Cant take her serious

[@jessicamacallister9272]

@@Isa_barchetta Is it just me or is Fil like really easy to listen to and understand what he means? I mean as a Fil video goes this is really really non techical. I spent the whole video like how....how do you not get it?! It isn't hard!

[@Isa_barchetta]

@@jessicamacallister9272 Fil' is brillant and its pretty amazing that this woman has Zero knowledge shes is not helpful at all.

[@cindi1313]

I think you are completely misunderstanding Fil's point about cover songs. He is NOT saying that someone like Vanny cannot do a cover song, but that she cannot make the copyright claim to get paid for it as her original work, which is what she is doing. Not only has he had people who have done cover songs make copyright claims to get ad revenue when he does an analysis of their song, he has actually had people who have done a cover song of someone else's song make a copyright claim to get ad revenue when he does an analysis of a DIFFERENT artist doing a cover version of that same song, because that other cover artist has registered that song as their original work! That is the fraud, registering the song that they did not write as their work and getting the ad revenue for it, not only when it is their own cover version, but even when it is other people's cover version.

[@dcd416]

wrong to be paid or claim to be the composer. / sogwriter. He said that.

[@IRGeamer]

What part of "the new deal with youtube just gives the ad rev directly to the copyright holders of the original recording without bothering with copyright strikes" did you not understand?

[@cindi1313]

@@IRGeamer I'll clarify it with a scenario that actually happened. Adele writes and records a song. Artist A, an adult male records a cover version, but registers it as HIS original work, and uploads it to KZbin. Artist B, an 11 year old girl, does a cover version of Adele's song and uploads to KZbin. Fil does an analysis of Artist B's cover, and receives a copyright claim for the ad revenue from Artist A, who had nothing whatsoever to do with the video. He didn't write the song and it wasn't his performance. That's the fraud.

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

But that's not what she's doing. Vanny recorded her own cover version of the songs (and yes the audio on Spotify IS different from Celine Dion's, though both are very good so that might not be obvious without directly comparing them), and properly credited the original songwriters for mechanical licensing purposes, so she did nothing wrong. Content ID then matched it to Vanny's audio. If that's correct, then that's fine, because the songwriter will get paid for the composition and Vanny will get paid for the audio (and the video uploader has no control over Content ID matches anyway, whether accurate or not). The only real problem with the videos that I see is misappropriation of TV show footage they don't have the rights to use and pasting themselves into it with insufficient notice that they weren't actually on the show.

[@regularperson4106]

If its so bad then why don't celine dion and her team do something about it????? if they don't, then its ok! Its up to the artist to actively activate the copyright, if he/she don't then thats a green light for other people to use their stuff. Its celine dion's fault not the other cover singers!

[@StevesRealReviews]

Been watching Wings of Pegasus videos for years!! Always good!!

[@flwrfan1752]

FB wouldn’t let me share a pic of a dog in a shelter so they can get adopted but these “ Singers” can defraud Celine Dione and Bobby Hatfield.

[@LaplacianDalembertian]

YT spends a lot of work banning people like Ukrainian politician Ruslan Kotsaba or American politician Jackson Hinkle for some bs ideology established in WH, but they can't find any time to ban thieves and thugs.

[@Hegstuffing]

A dog? And what about all of what I could call child porn they let in? I've never had a problem getting a photo posted.. Copy the image and content and paste it. Don't share it. Try that.

[@myhealthycat]

Would KZbin let you share pics of dogs to get adopted?

[@flwrfan1752]

@@myhealthycat -I don’t know.Maybe.

[@Pwecko]

I wouldn't want this woman representing me when she can't understand what Fil is talking about.

[@ghetifal]

She did understand what Fil said, and corrected it. Fil was wrong. I thought the lawyer was wrong but then I actually listened to Vanny and Celine's version and was embarrassed to see I was wrong. Fil must have just gone off a first mistaken impression that it was Celine, because in the first 5 seconds of each version its clear they are different and that Vanny has her own recording of it that does NOT use Celine's voice. And then Fil was wrong about how youtube content matches work.

[@SuziQ.]

⁠@@ghetifal, How was Fil wrong about how YT content matches work? He’s suffered a strike when he played one of his own songs. It was kind of funny, and it got reversed. I would think he would know exactly how those work.

[@kahekilimaui450]

@@Pwecko She's agreeing with Fil, she's just giving a deeper explanation

[@Tomtraubert2009]

the lawyer doesn't "...know the pitching thing..." what? Seriously?

[@nicocas3583]

She doesn’t know much of anything!

[@marielebars7233]

Well said! While Wings of Pegasus is absolutely brilliant and accurate.

[@jeffwatters9535]

Go Fil!! Expose all these fraudsters.

[@tasossaros8375]

@@jeffwatters9535 yes✅👍

[@nzlemming]

I think the key thing is that these are not covers or parodies - they're infringing on the original audio by using it and pretending it's theirs, as well as infringing on Cowell's IP. And there's the claiming of the song for revenue purposes.

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

That's the incorrect assumption that Fil made, never bothered to check, and then based his whole video off of. But it turns out that it's not true. Vanny Viabola's cover of "The Power of Love" sounds NOTHING like Celine Dion's cover of the same song in any way, and she does properly credit the songwriter Jennifer Rush for mechanical licensing purposes, so there is actually nothing wrong there, she's not stealing royalties from anyone. (Ms. Delgado seems not to have fallen into the same trap. Perhaps she did her due diligence before making her reaction/commentary video, despite pretending to be seeing Fil's video for the first time?)

[@zz424]

I hope that guy and his wife get thrown in jail.They should be doing twenty years

[@regularperson4106]

If its so bad then why don't celine dion and her team do something about it????? if they don't, then its ok! Its up to the artist to actively activate the copyright, if he/she don't then thats a green light for other people to use their stuff. Its celine dion's fault not the other cover singers!

[@zz424]

@@regularperson4106 WRONG!! So your position is that it's okay to steal the copyright, as long as the real copyright owner doesn't find out?

[@zz424]

@@regularperson4106 That is hilariously funny.Your position is people can steal stuff as long as they don't get caught? Answer me yes or no, if that is your position please?

[@scottw5253]

The audio is the ORIGINAL artist NOT A COVER

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

Actually I compared the two on Spotify, and it's not quite the same. Both the voice and the instruments are different, including not just timbre but inflection. And Vanny does give proper credit to the songwriter for the mechanical licensing. If Content ID is misidentifying the Celine Dion audio for Vanny, then that's on KZbin (edit: it's not, the audio is Vanny, not Celine), not the artists or even the video uploader. But if it's Vanny's audio, that's fine, because it is her own performance, not Celine Dion's, and due to the songwriter credit, the original songwriter does get composition royalties for it. The only real problem with the videos that I see is misappropriation of TV show footage they don't have the rights to use and pasting themselves into it with insufficient notice that they weren't actually on the show, as well as falsely claiming in the title and description that it's Celine when it's actually Vanny.

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

The audio in the video is the cover of the song by Vanny Vabiola (whom I believe is the person pasted into the TV show's video), not the cover of the same song by Celine Dion. (Neither one wrote the song, and the audio is clearly different in every way.) Content ID matched it to the correct audio, and I can see on Spotify that Vanny properly credited the songwriter for mechanical licensing purposes, so the songwriter should be getting paid for the composition and Vanny should be getting paid for the performance.

[@djtwo2]

@@ModusVivendiMedia So, you think Celine Dion only did one recording of the song?

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

@@djtwo2 If you are arguing that Celine Dion did another cover of the song "The Power of Love" which sounds identical to Vanny Viabola's cover of the same song, then please, do share a link to it (or if links aren't possible in comments, say exactly how I could search for and find it). I am perfectly willing to be wrong if that is the case. (I am sure I'm not, because even another version by Celine Dion would presumably be sung in a French Canadian accent like the only version I am aware of is, and which Vanny Viabola's cover is not.)

[@jsullivan2112]

Omfg. The audio in the video is Celine. She used it to draw attention to her own stuff on Spotify. There.

[@paulelverstone8677]

Fil from Wings of Pegasus is just great and his music analysis vids are really eye-opening. The takeaway from his channel is that he doesn't have a problem with pitch correction providing the artist is honest about using it. His recent breakdown analysis of Alter Bridge is worth a watch because, not only does the band get involved but the management/production also. Worth a watch...

[@jerryhedlund25]

If you don't listen to what someone says, how can you be a good lawyer? He says that she CLAIMS the original song as hers. Wtf...

[@HonRevPTB]

I have no idea how this woman passed the bar, she is clueless and missed the entire point of the video!!!!!!!

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

Because, unlike Fil, Ms. Delgado appears to do proper due diligence before saying anything. (I suspect she already checked out the situation before "reacting" to the video, despite pretending to be seeing it for the first time.) Vanny Viabola's cover is entirely different from Celine Dion's, she properly credits the songwriter for royalty purposes, and the version used in the video is Vanny Viabola's, not Celine Dion's. Fil made some mistaken assumptions and resulting false allegations, but Ms. Delgado didn't seem to fall into the same trap.

[@babybirdhome]

It’s you guys who didn’t listen - she said that when you perform a cover and register it, your cover version belongs to you, but when you register it, you register that the original song (the music, the vocals) are not yours. In this instance, you own _your performance_ but you don’t own the music or the original song. She’s also saying that KZbin’s content detection system knows that the original song belongs to the original artist/their label because that has already been registered in their system, so when another KZbinr who creates their own cover of that song registers their cover, it’s their cover of the song that gets flagged when someone else uses it and the rights/revenue or revenue sharing from the infringer goes to the artist who covered the song and it gets properly attributed to that person on the infringing video, but behind the scenes, the same system doing that attribution also knows that that’s a cover of an original song and the appropriate share of that revenue also goes to the original artist/their label since they own the original work that you legitimately covered. You only get the portion of revenue that belongs to you for your cover of the original song - the original artist/label gets the rest that belongs to them as the original owner of that property. No one is being deprived of their money due to Vannie or anyone else who does a cover of someone else’s song - the original owner still gets their share, it just doesn’t show the entire chain of ownership on a video that’s using someone else’s registered work.

[@ludy41]

Really?😂😂😂😂😂Nah! You are wrong.​@@ModusVivendiMedia

[@stuartgraham8287]

The "artist" is claiming that she is doing a cover song; however she is using Celine Dion's actual voice!

[@michaelmorrissey2248]

Yes, exactly.

[@ruthohare9840]

100% this, she seems to have totally missed that central point.

[@wasgreg]

@@ruthohare9840 Yep, it is NOT a cover. It is a lipsync claiming to be a cover.

[@LaurelT1948]

That is actually Bobby Hatfield singing Unchained Melidy in 1965 on the Andy Williams show.

[@donutsrule7372]

Thos attorney doesn't seem to get that, never hire her.

[@xjet]

I flagged the offending videos a couple of weeks ago -- but KZbin clearly doesn't care at all, so long as it's raking in the ad revenues.

[@nerdjournal]

Well, that, and you aren't the one that can call foul on someone else's copyright. The holder has to do that, so all of our collective incredulity means nothing unless the owners of the copyright have a problem with these videos.

[@xjet]

@@nerdjournal Didn't report it for copyright violation -- reported it for "scams and deceptive practices" which is a community guidelines violation.

[@IRGeamer]

@@xjet And you can report the entire channel if you click on "more" beside the channel description. This includes "Impersonation" of "someone else" if they are just re-uploading from another youtube channel.

[@poulwinther]

That's just bogus. Look how many videos Rick Beato got taken down, despite just playing snippets, clearly for educational purposes.

[@whatsername123]

@@xjet yep. I think a lot of us from Fils channel did. He put all the links in the description. But didn't suggest anyone to report. He knows his audience😅

[@JB_II]

I think you misunderstood what Fil was saying about Vanny. She did the same thing as the previous guy (I believe she is is wife, if I remember Fils video). She used Celine Dion’s voice, BUT claimed it was her s and a cover of the song. Then registered the ‘cover’ as hers to have the KZbin algorithm pick it up as hers and pay her.

[@AlanTov]

This

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

But that's not true. On Spotify the audio is clearly different from Celine Dion's in every way, and she does properly credit the songwriter for mechanical licensing purposes. She has just as much right to cover the song as Celine Dion since neither of them wrote it! If the YT video in question does use Celine Dion's audio (edit: it doesn't, it's Vanny's audio), then that's Content ID misidentifying which audio matches, something which happens quite a bit in classical music too, and which none of the artists involved or even the video uploader have any control over. But if it is Vanny's audio, then that's not a problem, she and the original songwriter get paid (for audio recording and composition respectively). The only real problem with the videos that I see is misappropriation of TV show footage they don't have the rights to use and pasting themselves into it with insufficient notice that they weren't actually on the show, as well as falsely claiming in the title and description that it's Celine when it's really Vanny.

[@lucydayLucida]

Fil's wrong this time. This Vanny Viabola is actually that good a singer. If you listen to her and Celine Dion you can tell they are different though. It is not a rip off scam as being claimed by Fil in her case.

[@HoudiniFontmeister]

I'm pretty certain that's not Vanny in the scam video. I need you to look her up and do your research. This woman looks different to her. Different nationality and different country likely. Not the same people. The scammers are taking real songs and covers and trying to get around content id checks that way. But they were caught. Therefore it is labeled correctly which means the writer (Jennifer Rush) is collecting a split of the royalties while Vanny collects the rest. The scam failed on that video. Vanny is innocent here and probably a victim racists not being able to tell different Asians apart smh.

[@bjbest]

God help your clients if you can’t even understand what Fil was saying 🤦‍♂️

[@thekeyboardzone-kas]

My thoughts exactly!

[@RezPlank]

@@bjbest As someone who has studied law for thousands of hours as a pro se litigant, I was prepared to defend her since law is like a different language and easy to misunderstand...but I can't. She is completely wrong and doesn't understand the basic underlying points. It's another of the endless examples of legal incompetence I watched in real time with "licensed" attorneys. When they're not corrupt and scamming, they're usually incompetent and getting paid for doing lousy and often destructive work.

[@ghetifal]

Fil was wrong. It's not that she can't understand what Fil was saying. It's that what Fil was saying was wrong. I'm a fan of Fil. But he's human. He was wrong about how youtube videos get tagged for songs. It's not pointing to the composer or original artist, its literally just identifying the exact recordings being played. In this case, there were Vanny covers having their audio played. Vanny is being defrauded here, not Celine. Fil didn't check to notice that the "Celine" song was not Celine's version. It's not the same key or same instrumentation. That's a great compliment to Vanny that her voice could be mistaken for Celine, but everything else about the recording, its obvious that it's not the Celine recording.

[@bobcricket4873]

@@ghetifal You may be right, it could be 'Vanny', but given Fil's evidence on his original video regarding the extensive use of Pitch Correction and Autotune on videos from this potentially fraudulent author of these 'reality' tv videos, frankly, claiming the honest and real quality of the voice here is delusional.

[@jscire__872]

51:46 I don't believe his point has been that an "artist is fake" for using pitch correction (which is different from autotune, and more "subtle" than autotune, if you like) but that the artistry of singing gets diminished when a performance is artificially made to "hit the line" as he would put it. What he's usually saying is that pitch correction takes away expressiveness and variability from the human voice, and is often done completely unnecessarily as standard practice which lessens the resulting music. The most gorgeous human voices don't "hit the lines" and that's what brings out their unique texture. Pitch correction is a tool that I think he's saying is easily recognizable but is misused and especially overused out of all proportion. It also just so happens that it's a tool that can be utilized by these kinds of con artists.

[@moorek1967]

It is still fraud. You are making people believe you are singing it that way when you are not. Either sing for real or get out of the game.

[@davidpetersen1]

And I get a copyright strike for a Discovery documentary I wrote and directed 25 years ago where the production company went out of business before the invention of birth certificates and I can't find who owns it to get permission. My feeling is as the writer/ director I should have the ability to waive any monetization and upload my work as a personal archive. Fil is awesome!!! Imma one of his first 100 Subs. :)

[@angelaboncore3132]

I believe you are missing the point about "real" voices the way Fil does. He knows this business. Auto Tune/Pitch Correction has moved your original voice if it was flat or sharp of the note and moved it right over the line to where it now sounds perfect...WTH, - the emotion/the feeling/ the soul of the "original" voice is now fabricated to sound grand and this is NOT okay. It's fraud plain and simply. Not only that these frauds are miming/lip synching to the "original" voice ie: Bobby Hatfield, Celine Dion. That is NOT music and this is not okay. It's cheating/defrauding the public and yes I do believe they are making money on these videos and this is why Fil has been alerted to what is going on. He will take the bull by its horns and aim to get this resolved.

[@fftofgp]

There are people that use auto tune as a tool to add an effect to their voice. I think she mentioned T Pain. I believe he uses it, but also proved he can sing well without it, but likes the effect it has on his voice like reverb or delay might do. I might even go along with a bit of pitch correction, which is to me a more precise use of auto tune type technology. It's just done manually so that you can pick and choose when, where, and how you want to fix the notes, and it's not as robotic and drastic as straight auto tune. The problem I have is with people that can not sing well on their own using it to fool people into thinking they can. Krystle must understand that in her world, there are many lawyers, some better and some not as good, and some basically the same as her. As long as they all meet some minimum standard of qualification, there shouldn't really be any animosity among all of them as far as practicing law. You may feel odd if you are a top echelon lawyer and a newbie or someone with a poor record gets high profile cases, but there's nothing really wrong occurring. However, imagine someone that either tried to become a lawyer and couldn't cut it, or was passed through everything without any effort at all because of connections, and somehow obtained a license to practice law without any real knowledge or credentials they actually earned. Imagine that person competing with you for cases and sometimes beating you out for them. That's what it feels like when artists work hard to get where they are, especially ones that came before all of this tech, and they have to watch as people nowhere near their caliber and talent rise and become as known or more so than them. People come to you because they believe you know what you're doing. They don't want to find out you're asking Google how to defend them or otherwise deal with their case.

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

That's all irrelevant, because in this case Fil, perhaps confused by the misleading use of Celine Dion's name in the title and description of the video, mistakenly assumed that the audio was Celine Dion's, when it wasn't. The two covers sound NOTHING alike, down to the different accents the words are pronounced in. (Celine Dion is French Canadian, and Vanny Viabola is Indonesian, so they pronounce the words very differently.) Also, while it isn't apparent on KZbin, I could see from a brief check on Spotify that Vanny did indeed credit Jennifer Rush as the songwriter for mechanical licensing purposes, so the respective royalties should all be going to the correct places.

[@angelaboncore3132]

@@ModusVivendiMedia - you just don't get do you....not even worth the retort to your inane comment

[@milkcarton6654]

For me I see it as the same as people who were complaining about synthesizers or electronic music in the early 80s. Like oh it's not real instruments, it's fabricated sounds or just notes entered in a program, there's no musicianship involved. So what, electronic musicians are praised for their composing skills, just not their playing skill.. Nobody has any issues with that nowadays. Like nobody will have any issue with autotune and pitch correction in twenty more years. It doesn't really matter if the person doesn't have the vocal skills to sing it right, only the end result matter Does it sound good? Is it making you feel something? Ill grant that personally I don't like the sound of autotune but that's just it... because i can hear it. Soon youll be able to correct voices and you won't be able to tell so yeah, having singing talent will stop mattering but so what, you'll still need to be a good composer. That will never change. And perhaps it's the only thing that ever mattered when making music (I mean Mozart was a great piano player but I don't think he could play the rest of the instruments he put into his symphonies, he was just writing the notes for each instrument to play), having technical skill on an instrument or with your voice used to be necessary because there was no other way to make these sounds. But if you can do it digitally without having to learn to paly anything, AND if you can't tell the difference... why bother learning to play? I say this as 46 year old guy who taught himself to play guitar bass and keys 30 years ago and learned to sing reasonably well and in tune about ten years ago. I'm glad I taught myself to play and sing. But if there had been other, easier ways to make the music i wanted to make, then maybe I'D have used them

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

@@milkcarton6654 Already it's easy to correct voices in ways that nobody (not even Mr. Wings of Pegasus himself) can tell. I am quite confident that the commercial recordings of Adele and everyone else typically used as examples of "people who don't need autotune" are ALSO routinely touched up with a bit of selectively-applied pitch correction here and there. Anyway, I agree with everything you said here. Fil's channel thrives financially on the controversy he stirs up by "catching" other musicians "cheating" or otherwise, in his mind, doing something wrong. In this case he's flung around a number of unfounded accusations against innocent musicians beyond just the notion that they might be using autotune, but I don't expect any public correction or apology from him because him "being right" in catching other musicians "being wrong" is too important to the paycheck he receives from his channel. (But let's just say that copyright law, how cover songs and the royalties therefrom work, and how Content ID matching and the resulting royalty payments works are all well beyond his areas of expertise.)

[@corilia9529]

Film explains everything he says. He talks about people using established songs and claiming them as their own among other things. He does not lie about anything he is showing you

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

I don't think Fil is intentionally lying, but he did make a false assumption (along the lines of "since it sounds great, it must be Celine Dion singing"), never bothered to check that it was true, than proceeded to make a bunch of mostly-false allegations, which most everyone here is now getting outraged over. Vanny Viabola's cover of "The Power of Love" is 100% legit and she did nothing wrong. It's completely different from Celine Dion's cover of the same song, and Vanny did credit the original songwriter (Jennifer Rush) for mechanical licensing purposes, so the royalties are all going where they should (to Jennifer Rush for the songwriting and to Vanny Viabola for the performance and recording). The video dropping Celine Dion's name in the title and description, even though her recording of the song is NOT used in the video, may have contributed to the confusion.

[@cindyspowart555]

NO! They're not singing covers. It's the actual original singer's voice we're hearing!

[@HonRevPTB]

EXACTLY, THANK YOU, I CAN'T BELIEVE HOW MANY OF THESE PEOPLE DON'T GET THAT!!!!!!!

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

Except that it's not. Fil appears to have made this false assumption (possibly confused due to the misleading use of Celine Dion's name in the title and description of the video), and never bothered to check. But it isn't Celine Dion singing, it's Vanny Viabola (they sound NOTHING alike), and Vanny does indeed properly credit the songwriter Jennifer Rush for mechanical licensing purposes, so those royalties are going to the right place.

[@moorek1967]

@@ModusVivendiMedia You can say all you want that a person wrote the song, but if the person does not have rights because they sold them, then it is the recording company who owns the rights. Not even the artist themselves own rights, it is always the recording company. To do covers for performance, you literally need permission from BMI, ASCAP or any other licensing agency. Were you aware that even bars who play jukeboxes must also have licensing rights to the songs? Yes, even when you hear Stairway To Heaven in your local grocery store, that store who purchased the music package, called Muzak, must have permission to play it in the store.

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

​@@moorek1967 Thank you for bringing this up. You seem to have some understanding of copyright law (more than most people!), but copyright law is still so complex that you're missing some things. You're right that "public performances" (bars, restaurants, bookstores, coffee shops, other retail stores, nail salons, concerts, festivals, any place that plays either recorded or live music of any copyrighted songs) must have a license for it. Usually it's a blanket license with a monthly fee, sometimes included as part of a package that supplies the music itself, like Muzak as you mentioned. But even a live concert venue or place with open mic nights or a street fair that has live performers needs a license, for when live performers do covers. It's also true that in order to include any copyrighted music (either from an existing recording, or an original cover performance of a copyrighted song) as part of a VIDEO requires a sync license to be negotiated in advance with the copyright owner. However, practically speaking, barely anyone bothers with sync licenses for KZbin, and barely any copyright owners actually care, because Content ID will usually pick up the usage, monetize the video, and automatically pay the copyright owner, with no effort on their part. I suspect that copyright law will eventually change to catch up with this reality (to make an exception when there's a reasonable expectation that the content being used will be matched and monetized automatically by the platform), but such change is slow, so there's a lot of "technically illegal but nobody involved cares any more" uses of copyrighted content in KZbin videos. (In the case of the videos Fil was discussing here, it does not appear that any of the performers knew their music recordings or music videos were being incorporated into these videos.) But for making audio-only recordings of cover songs, no, performers and their record labels do NOT need to ask permission first, because the license for this, known as a "mechanical license", is a "compulsory" license (it must be granted, so no advance permission is needed) and is also a "statutory" license (the rate to be paid is set by statute, or law, so does not need to be negotiated). In the case of physical products to be sold, such as CDs and vinyl records, and for selling "permanent downloads", a license needs to be secured and the royalty paid in advance to cover the number of units manufactured or anticipated to be sold, which is perhaps most commonly done through the website Easy Song Licensing. But for streaming, this does not need to be done, because the streaming platforms (Spotify, Apple Music, KZbin Music etc.) split these royalties off and, at least in the US, pay them directly to the MLC (Mechanical Licensing Collective), who then pays them to the various publishers. All that the performer or their record label needs to do is CREDIT the name of the songwriter in the metadata that accompanies the track when it's uploaded through a distributor to the DSPs (streaming platforms). The DSPs then pass along this "songwriter/composer" metadata to the MLC along with the royalty, so the MLC knows which publisher to pay.

[@TitanicHorseRacingLover]

Exactly

[@UserNameWasCensored]

Fil is a great guy. I wholeheartedly recommend the Wings of Pegasus channel. With respect to Pitch Correction and Autotune, TMA says that she doesn't mind artists using this technique (referencing Cher among others) at 38:30 or so. It's not that simple. Not to knock TMA (fascinating video, btw) but I suspect that she's not a musician. Previously, singers had to be able to sing. Now all singers are Pitch Corrected (on recordings) and Autotuned (live performances). A lot of times (most?), artists are unaware that their voices are being processed. In 2024, the only - ONLY - way to know if someone has a great voice is to hear them sing live without a microphone. It's really become that bad...

[@davidvenzke3669]

Why don’t you understand he said she played Celine Dions actual recording and claimed it as her voice. As a lawyer I would think you would have better listen skills, but this younger generation has forgotten how to listen and try to prove they’re smarter by assuming too quickly what people are actually saying.

[@daisymoses6812]

I concur about today's tendency to assume too quickly. HOWEVER ...Miss Krystle appears to be very convinced Vanny Vabiola is performing with her own voice, and covering the Celine song. Her expressionless cry of approval at 16:11 is a little bit eerie, actually. Even Fil Henley listens to Vanny later on, and notices that she has an ability to vibrato although suspects she's been pitch-corrected by her 'partner in crime' Andri.

[@ildico1]

She might be a lawyer, but she definitely did not understand a thing Fil said in the video.

[@AnthonyKellett]

You seem to have missed the whole point, with Vanny's 'cover'. She did NOT "do a cover". Fil clearly said, "That's Celine Dion's voice". Vanny is miming to the original. THEN, she claims it's a cover and copyrights it. So, effectively, she's copyrighting Celine Dion's performance.

[@LaurelT1948]

He is also lipsyncing Bobby Hatfield’s 1965 TV performance of Unchained Melody.

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

That's false, Vanny's audio on Spotify is clearly different from Celine Dion's (though both are very good so it might not be obvious without directly comparing them), and she properly credits the songwriters of each song for mechanical licensing purposes. If the KZbin video in question actually uses Celine Dion's audio (edit: it isn't, it's using Vanny's audio), then the problem is Content ID misidentifying the audio to match, and not the fault of anyone including the video uploader. The only real problem with the videos that I see is misappropriation of TV show footage they don't have the rights to use, pasting themselves into the video with perhaps insufficient notice that they weren't actually on the show, and mentioning Celine Dion in the title and description when her recording is not actually being used at all.

[@jessiem276]

@@ModusVivendiMedia Wrong!

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

@@jessiem276 I'm not sure even how to respond to this. If I said "your username is clearly "darthvader" and you said, "no, my username is "jessiem276, wtf are you talking about?", and I responded "Wrong!", would it make any sense? Fil made an incorrect assumption, never bothered to check, and then proceeded to make a whole big video full of mostly false allegations. (Ms. Delgado didn't seem to fall into the same trap; she correctly identified the things that were wrong and the things that weren't wrong with the videos. Maybe she did her due diligence before making the video despite pretending to be seeing it for the first time.) Most commenters here seem to be making the same incorrect assumptions that Fil did, and also didn't bother to check whether it was actually true or not. The false assumption being made seems to be this: because this rendition of the song sounds very good, it MUST be Celine Dion. Nobody bothered to check what Celine Dion's version of the song actually sounds like, what Vanny Viabola's version of the song sounds like, and then realize, "oh, they ARE different, and the one in the video IS Vanny Viabola's and not Celine Dion's". Also, Fil didn't seem to check whether Vanny Viabola properly credited the original songwriter (Jennifer Rush) for mechanical licensing purposes (she did). (Admittedly, I didn't see this credit information on KZbin, I had to go to Spotify to find it.) So he made the false assumption (and claim) that Vanny Viabola was stealing Celine Dion's audio (she wasn't) and Jennifer Rush's song (she wasn't), and everyone else here piled on with the same false assumptions, and resulting misplaced outrage. As Ms. Delgado pointed out, there are some copyright violations (use of the TV footage without permission) and possible points of confusion in the video (is it obvious enough that it's a fake/parody composite? is it misleading to drop Celine Dion's name in the title and description when her recording is not even being used?), but the problems are not related to some artist falsely stealing the audio of Celine Dion and songwriting of Jennifer Rush, because that is not what happened.

[@tr5947]

@@ModusVivendiMedia "Both are very good". That's hilarious. One is the product of talent; one is primarily the product of Melodyne.

[@rstuartcpa]

"de minius = teensy-teensy" is the best legal definition I've heard in a long time. I'm going to try that with the IRS during my next audit.

[@The-Weekend-Warrior]

I don't understand why you're saying that she's OK doing a cover and registering it as HER OWN song. She's not. She can for sure do the cover and monetize HER PERFORMANCE of the song, but claim authorship on someone else's song is WRONG. Wings of Pegasus was talking about this, not saying that it's not OK to do cover songs, but it's FRAUD to register the song in your cover as YOUR composition. Maybe I misunderstood you, but I feel there's some confusion here.

[@dagga07]

She says it's OK as long as the original composer is getting the mechanical royalties. The cover artist can still get performance royalties and monetize the song on music platforms

[@denalinde]

There’s a cover license on KZbin.

[@wooddogg8]

@@denalinde Does that license include having a video? I've heard you need a synchronization license to make a video to go with your cover. I would assume even a still image of your band would still be considered a video.

[@denalinde]

@@wooddogg8 I misread your question, but yes, it does include video. 💜

[@wooddogg8]

@@denalinde Cool, thanks

[@MsFm2000]

I think this is what's happening: 1) the guy is searching for good sounding covers or original songs that have not been pitch corrected, 2) he then pitch corrects them and registers them as his own song or cover. 3) He then publishes them to KZbin with new content IDs. KZbin can't detect them because the digital signatures are different from that of the original content.

[@jwrobich]

They have been clever with the fraud being committed on everyone including KZbin but I would hate to be on the receiving end of the colossal collapse that’s coming for them!

[@HoudiniFontmeister]

They have a mix of real songs and covers. They probably started getting caught for the real songs and switched to using covers. When they got to Vannys cover of the power of love KZbin accurately flagged it as her cover. Meaning that video was a failed scam attempt. The scam is being successful on every video that isn't picking up on the content id scans. I think the only pitch correction happening here is either in a studio by the original artists and cover artists although I don't believe Vanny actually used any. But even if she did she has the right. What's not right is the scammers using her cover to try and scam people and people mistaking her for the scammer which is wild because they are entirely different kinds of Asian. But it seems people are convinced they are the same woman smh.

[@djvargr7199]

The 2nd track situation is an absolute mess. When looking at the original fake video, it's not even Vanny Viabola in the video, it's some dude in drag impersonating a cover artist, poorly lipsynching Vanny's version. 2 different accounts posted the same video with the same caption (maybe the same guy) with over 1.1M views between them.

[@The.Android]

Oh dear. How can you be a "Top" Music Attorney when you don't understand what is going on or what is being said or claimed or whose work it even is?

[@HoudiniFontmeister]

She's right. Fil made several glaring mistakes by not doing deeper research here. He needs to correct it. But she could tell that he had it backwards. The content id system is not being abused here. The videos without flags are the successful scams. What part do you find jarring? Her dismissal of Fils false assumption that the scammers are registering songs and stealing that way which is misidentifying Vanny Viobola as one of the scammers when she is not in any way. Or how he falsely assumed the power of love was Celine Dion and not Vanny Viobola? Which you can easily figure out is dead wrong. She could tell and her intuition caught on that Vanny may not be involved the way people think. And as a lawyer none of that is what you think it is. And for whatever reason her knowing the law and explaining it to you is pissing you off because you don't understand it? Am I getting this right?

[@geetarman]

I myself have been acused of my singing not being my voice people saying nobody can sing that bad not humanly possible

[@DevilAndSons]

What seems to have been missed - if you record a cover and put it on KZbin, there will be shared monetisation or full monetisation to the person who owns the recording rights. So when I do one I don't get a strike or a video taken down, but I do not get monetised. So if someone, like in the cases Fil shows, claims ownership of the song it is them that gets the money not the actual real owner of the rights.

[@rikardottosson1272]

Also - it’s not that cover. It’s Celine’s version . Why do any money go to the cover? That’s insane

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

The audio in the "Simon Cowell Cried When The Heard Extraordinary Voice Singing The Power Of Love - Celine Dion" video is Vanny Viabola's cover of Jennifer Rush's song "The Power of Love", and sounds nothing at all like Celine Dion's cover of the same song. Fil got confused, made a false assumption, never bothered to check that it was true, and as a result made a series of false allegations which most everyone here is now getting outraged over.

[@thequieterubcomethemoreuhe1198]

You're a bit inempt as a 'lawyer' when you completely miss the the fact that the 'cover' was an audible of the original artists' voice! And so, lawyer, what are you doing about it? Action is needed, not a channel reaction!🙄

[@danielmccormick3611]

Not her clients...pretty simple

[@drobichaud1000]

Lol she's not a lawyer. Maybe a pretend youtube lawyer.

[@danielmccormick3611]

@@drobichaud1000 google her

[@mercenarygrip]

There are NO covers in this video. It's all the original artists! They are simply PRETENDING while STEALING the original audio. Pay attention!

[@jimh8633]

"That pitching thing"? How can she be a music lawyer and not get this stuff?

[@Old-Skull.]

Imagine there was a software program that allows you to work as a lawyer , making you a virtual lawyer without having to study a career or being allowed to operate in a territory, imagine this program is sold with a machine that records what is told in a room and this machine decide what to do for you , you can go with it to courts or to any place you go , imagine the drop in prices and the lack of job, with techno-lawyers flourishing like mushrooms . Would you be ok with that ? knowing that you are a person with a career and with a natural talent to litigate or to assist someone in a difficult moment ? would you be ok having to clean tables and wash dishes bc there is no job and the little job available is really low paid ? I know the comparison is terrible but if you are smart you get the idea , stomping real talent bc there is technology that allows untalented and mediocre people to shine is not ok, Autotune is just a studio tool , never intended to be used to hide the fact that you can't sing, there is no such a thing like an autotune genre , there is just rappers that use it excessively to hide the obvious lack of talentwhile pretending that is cool , don't get me wrong I don't blame them, for me the problem lies in the lack of musical knowledge and culture of the people who fall for it .

[@HonRevPTB]

"It's late, he's in his pajamas, that's why he's holding the baby!" This woman is so unbelievably clueless it's unreal!!! She completely missed the point of the video, idk how she passed the bar exam!!!

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

No, Ms. Delgado is the one who, apparently having done some due diligence before commenting publicly, gets everything right. Fil started off with some mistaken assumptions, never bothered to check, then spun that into a video full of false allegations which thousands of people on the internet are now getting inappropriately outraged over.

[@PeteC62]

Your sarcasm detector needs new batteries.

[@HonRevPTB]

@@PeteC62 Apparently you have absolutely no idea when someone is making a legitimate comment or a sarcastic one, so I think your common sense meter is broken!!!

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

@@HonRevPTB Honestly your comment closely resembled dozens of other apparently very serious ones saying roughly the same things (without any hint of sarcasm) so I would say that communicating clearly, particularly in comments on the internet, is helpful if you don't want people to misunderstand when you're meaning the opposite of what you're saying. Now that I read your comment more carefully, with the foreknowledge that you did mean it sarcastically, I do see the clues of course. Glad to hear that you agree with me! 👍😃

[@josephgallagher945]

YT is making $$ off of the reaction channels too. Phil knows what he's talking about.

[@frankpratte8358]

But it's not a cover if they're just miming, right?

[@kirkgannaway5098]

no, the singer has copyright to his vocal

[@zoeherriot]

Correct - this is not a cover.

[@poopybutt29]

the celine dion ones are being mimed

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

Vanny's audio on Spotify is clearly different from Celine Dion's, though both are very good so it might not be obvious without directly comparing them, and she properly credits the original songwriters for mechanical licensing purposes, so she did nothing wrong, it is a true cover. If for some reason the KZbin video uses Celine Dion's audio but credited Vanny, then that's a problem with Content ID matching to the wrong audio (a problem I have seen frequently in classical recordings), and not the fault of any of the artists or the video uploader, who have no control over that. (Edit: no, the audio in the video is Vanny's. not Celine Dion's, so the Content ID match is correct.)

[@HoudiniFontmeister]

It is a cover. Celine's version was also a Cover too 😂. But this isn't Celine's version clearly! Super easy to tell when you look it up. And Vanny does credit and share revenue with the original writer so everything is legal. The illegality is on the scammers who as far as we know have zero connections to Vanny or any of the other artists being mimed on the videos.

[@trumanburbank6899]

A cover song is when you are singing with your own voice someone else's material. But these people are lip-synching to the original artists voice, pretending that it's their own voice. If I'm lip-synchin Elvis, and telling people that that is my voice, that's not a cover, that's fraud.

[@MarkyMarkIRL]

I think you’re missing the Celine Dion situation… it’s not a cover… it’s actually Celine and this person is mouthing to the song.

[@SuperWayneyb]

I would have thought a lawyer would be better at listening.

[@goreyfantod5213]

37:02 I believe what Fil is pointing out with the content ID tags for "Vanny," in the fake talent show videos, is that the cover songs have been fraudulently registered within the Content ID system. In other words, it's not that the Adriani fellow and his spouse/partner have lip-synced to legitimately registered covers of well-known songs. What he seems to have done is found a gap in the system wherein he's managed to claim the songs to a likely pseudonymous person (Vanny). So, he's getting ad revenue for the video as well as 100% for the, "claimed," song. e.g. I cover, "My Heart Will Go On," by Celine Dion & upload a video of me singing it to KZbin. Normally, KZbin's Content ID algorithm would detect the song, then detect that it's not Celine singing it, so the revenue would be either fully or partially claimed by the rights holder, i.e. the songwriters and/or Sony Canada, Dion herself, etc., and a Content ID tag is appended to the description to indicate that the rights are owned by someone other than me, the uploader. I think Fil is saying that this creator has somehow figured out a way to falsely pre-claim the cover version in its entirety (i.e. a music AND a composition claim), which is why the Content ID is showing an image of the hijabi spouse/girlfriend rather than the actual original singer. In my example above of me uploading a cover of, "My Heart Will Go On," the Content ID system would correctly flag the song as a cover, but the revenue would be diverted to Vanny, rather than the rights holder. If I had to guess, there may be something digitally embedded in the covers that is tricking the algorithm, not unlike the example Fil showed of the reversed/flipped video from AGT. It's a bit confusing, but it sounds very similar to the more familiar copyright thief scam that I'm used to on KZbin, in which an unconnected third party falsely claims ownership & issues a DMCA takedown notice. Since the Content ID system is algorithmic & managed by AI, creators have to file a dispute with supporting evidence in order to get a human being to actually look at the video & reverse a claim. So, a 3rd party scammer can hold videos hostage, banking on the fact that a large percentage of creators relinquish rights rather than dispute claims, out of fear of having their entire channel taken down.

[@Terri_MacKay]

@@goreyfantod5213 You got it absolutely right. I watch Fil regularly, and he's talked more about this during his livestreams. His issue is that people who had nothing to do with the creation of the song are claiming ownership, and, somehow are able to strike channels who use the song. On top of everything else, a lot of people in his comments aren't just angered by the fraud, but the blatant theft of royalties that should be going to the rightful owners of the songs.

[@MorningCoffeeVinylSide]

Right - so I think what's happening is that some person is recording covers of songs - renaming them and claiming the song as an original and releasing them. Then and 2nd person is releasing their cover of that song but using the original title in their representation, and it's getting claimed either by content ID for the fraudster, or manually by the fraudster, and they are siphoning off the revenue with a couple layers of protecting or obsfucation. Most likely all parties are related and this is a long con. Most likely the original fraudster is releasing these renamed covers through a distributor that's only releasing them to the KZbin ecosystem so they fly under the radar but get recognized by KZbin as their original work... Content ID might have a hierarchy in the algorithm that doesn't deep dive if it detects an exact audio match to a registered song.

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

But that's not true, on Spotify Vanny's audio is clearly different from Celine Dion's (though both are very good so it might not be obvious without directly comparing them), and she properly credits the original songwriters for mechanical licensing purposes. If the KZbin video uses Celine Dion's audio but credits Vanny, that's a Content ID mistake in matching (a technical issue which I have seen in classical music quite a lot), and not the fault of any of the artists or the video uploader (who has no control over that). The only real problem with the videos that I see is misappropriation of TV show footage they don't have the rights to use and pasting themselves into it with insufficient notice that they weren't actually on the show.

[@MorningCoffeeVinylSide]

@@ModusVivendiMedia right but her cover on Spotify is her cover…. On KZbin they are picking it up as attributed to her but also incorrect yet titled…. that’s not just a mistake because it’s two levels of incorrect - and then replicated which makes it 3 levels… Someone is intentionally submitting (perhaps without her knowledge) Celine’s recordings as a new composition attributed to Vanny through a distributor - but only to KZbin and its content ID universe. And KZbin’s content ID is catching those (perhaps because they have an audio tag that differentiates them from Celine)…. I’d suggest Vanny is either in on it, or someone within her orbit has just set up to collect on those specific works through a distributor that only distributes to KZbin - and that Vanny’s name may be credited - but the back account this grey market distributor is paying out to is controlled by someone else in this criminal enterprise. All this would require is someone setting this up through a grey market distributor that only targeted KZbin.

[@ghetifal]

@@MorningCoffeeVinylSide You are missing the whole point. KZbin is mechanically matching the audio to an existing an registered recording. The scam couple did not record their own version of it and then have it matched to Vanny. They just straight up used Vanny's audio. KZbin functioned correctly in detecting Vanny's audio. Vanny has license with the original artist/representatives (which is not Celine Dion). If someone does a cover of one of these songs from their band room, I don't think youtube will be able to content match it. It's matching an exact recording, not the "gist" of the song.

[@zig_zagman]

Taking this guy to task over his inaccuracies with legal terminology is a little harsh, as he is not a lawyer, but a musician.

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

Well he also made some mistaken assumptions and subsequently a video full of false allegations, which everyone here and on his channel is now inappropriately getting outraged over. The audio in the video is Vanny Viabola's cover, which sounds nothing like Celine Dion's, and Vanny does properly credit the songwriter for royalty purposes, so she did nothing wrong and the royalties are all going exactly where they are supposed to.

[@moorek1967]

@@ModusVivendiMedia The songwriter does not matter if she sold the song. If she sold the song to the recording company Celine sings for, then the recording company owns all rights. Why do people think the artists is who owns music? Record producers own them. The artist gets paid royalties from the recording company, not straight record sales.

[@jscan]

Rare statement from a genuine honest, informed lawyer; 'the main purpose of copyright is to encourage creativity' It only coincidentally feeds corporate greed as a side-effect...

[@rnrpeg1]

Huh? Wings of Pegasus is saying that the Celine song us NOT a cover. Just like Unchained Medley - it's actually the ORIGINAL SONG FROM THE ORIGINAL ARTIST. Not simply a cover version. Totally different.

[@ghetifal]

Yes, and the lawyer has the ears to hear that Fil was wrong. There's no debate that the scammers are lipsyncing, but Fil missed that there is no audio of Celine involved at all. He makes it sound like Vanny is some kind of scammer and she is correcting that. She could have more forcefully pointed out Fil's error, but instead just pointed out the situation without trying to drag FIl through the mud for not being able to recognize that Vanny is entitled to make cover versions of songs like countless other artists and bands have done.

[@rnrpeg1]

@@ghetifal Okay now I have to watch this garbage all over again?! LOL. To be honest, I wouldn't know the original from karaoke. I live by my motto: Friends don't let friends listen to Celine Dion. (But thank you for clarifying and correcting my comment.🤘) Ohhh, you could react to the sad Janes ending. Gotta be some legal angles within. Word from good sources say Perry's wife was certainly threatening to sue the band backstage as the fight continued. 😯

[@Mindflux_Zubzub]

@@ghetifal People are allowed to cover songs, as long as you credit the correct people and pay the royalties. What is being pointed out here and is a major transgression is that Vinny then goes on to register the cover she has done AS HER OWN WORK!! You cannot register someone else's original creation as your own, just because you have covered it. That is what most people are missing here. That is a MAJOR fraud.

[@zoeherriot]

No he is saying she has done a cover of the song, but registered it as her song.

[@maryswanson9982]

Artists need to be protected. Using a voice, and saying it’s yours deserves a copyright strike.

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

Perhaps true, but that's not what happened here. Contrary to what Fil falsely claims and most people here seem to be assuming, the "Simon Cowell Cried When The Heard Extraordinary Voice Singing The Power Of Love - Celine Dion" video does not contain Celine Dion's voice or anything from her cover of the song, and I'm pretty sure the same is true of the other videos (though I haven't bothered to check them all as exhaustively). The mistake Fil and most people seem to be making is that when they heard a great-sounding rendition of the song, they automatically assumed that it must be Celine Dion's version. But it's not. Everything about it is completely different, including the inflections, vibrato, phrasing, and even accent of the voice (Celine Dion sings in a French Canadian accent, but Vanny Viabola is Indonesian, so they way they pronounce words is completely different.).

[@ericzeichert511]

One thing about professional racketeers is that, as a general rule, they don't walk up to you and say "I am about to make you a victim of an extremely intricate scam." Also, I suspect many of them began by doing legitimate things, but then find they can make a ton of money by crossing the lines. You mentioned in your vid that laws vary by jurisdiction. Well, Pegasus is British, I think Vanny is Indonesian and AA is Filipino, and KZbin is everywhere. So good luck sorting it out.

[@djstacktrace]

24:38 it drives me crazy that so many people still think it’s OK to just disclaim it away

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

Did it occur to anyone that the copyright owners whose content is being used in these parody mash-up videos don't WANT the videos to be taken down? They get royalties from the Content ID match of the use of their content. They chose to MONETIZE Content ID matches, when they could have just as easily chosen to BLOCK such matches instead. Taking down the videos would result in them losing out on the passive income from this use of their content. It's wrong for any of us to assume what the copyright owners want to happen and take it into our own hands.

[@ghetifal]

The main issue here is all the trademark infringements that are also associated with these videos.

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

@@ghetifal But the same is true with trademark infringement: it's up to the trademark owner, not us, as to whether it bothers them. Nobody in the world would confuse the channel as actually being NBC Universal television that uploaded the videos, so it doesn't really violate the main intent of trademarks: to avoid confusion. Those trademarks are in nearly all cases embedded into the copyrighted material (audio, video, etc.) used in the videos, so if the owners of those copyrights allow monetized use of their content catalogs in creator videos on KZbin (which, if those catalogs exist in Content ID and are monetized rather than blocked, we can assume they do), then, unless the resulting video is somehow really offensive to them, they're not likely to complain about trademark infringement either. About the only additional potential infringement is name-dropping Celine Dion to attract attention when her recordings weren't even used in the videos, but I think that use of her name is more of a clarification that the songs are famous because of Celine Dion's covers of them (to the point that a lot of people assume she wrote them or was those songs first performer), even if those aren't the same covers as used in the video.

[@Wanda-lm5fq]

Actually, he says that many of these videos are using the original audio of the actual artist. NOT a cover version. And lip syncing to the audio

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

Fil says that, yes, but he is wrong.

[@marysalvi242]

Hi, Miss Krystle -- Wings of Pegasus actually is a pro on the auto-tune & pitch-correction that is now done all the time by the record companies. So the music part your not actually understanding. You've missed that the female in the beginning is using Celine's recording - NOT doing a cover at all, it's Celine herself.

[@ghetifal]

No, Fil missed that the female was using Vanny's recording. I know its hard to face that a lawyer recognized music better than Fil, but it is what it is. I am a Fil fan, and I also originally assumed the lawyer was wrong until I went and double checked on my own. Fil was wrong. He didn't actually check, because Fil also would obviously here the difference if he checked the Vanny and Celine versions side by side, or if he was very familiar with the original Celine version in details like instrumentation and stuff. Then he also didn't realize that a recording copyright is separate from a "melody/lyrics" copyright.

[@ildico1]

Autotune is a form of cheating and it’s off-putting. If you can’t sing, you shouldn’t be a singer-there are plenty of other careers out there. Full stop.

[@D4N1CU5]

It seemed like the originals are being re-registered as covers and then the original is used in the video but claimed as the cover?

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

This is what Fil assumed, and neither he nor anyone else here seems to have checked whether it was true, but it's not. The audio in the video is Vanny Viabola, and it sounds nothing at all like Celine Dion's cover of the same song. And Vanny does indeed properly credit the original songwriter for the track, so all the royalties should be going to the proper places.

[@DonnaleaSpencer]

@@ModusVivendiMedia So, on the Bon Jovi song where it doesn't credit Bon Jovi, it's actually crediting Bon Jovi? I'm confused. As for the Celine Dion song - the one in Fil's video, I'm going back to re-watch, because it very much sounded like Celine to me. I Will look at that one again. Thank you.

[@DonnaleaSpencer]

@@ModusVivendiMedia OK I just re-watched and there's more than one thing going on if you 'checked whether it was true". Reference is to multiple channels of Andi, Alexi, Andron, Adrian, AA Andre, etc etc. At 8:30 someone in a dress (Andi?) comes on to sing "Power of Love" but it is Celine Dion's vocals (no reference to Vanny yet). Only when Fil scrolls to see who owns the copyright did it come up with Vanny's name. (so, she is not the person singing in the video and he doesn't say she is). He is referencing Andi aka Andri aka Alexi aka Andron aka Adrian as such. BUT Fil is questioning why Vanny comes up as the copyright owner of the song.

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

@@DonnaleaSpencer I don't feel like going back and re-checking, but I believe on Spotify the Bon Jovi cover was credited as having the songwriter "Jon Bongiovi" so it also sends the songwriting royalties to the original songwriter.

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

@@DonnaleaSpencer Yes, the songwriting credits are not maybe showing up on KZbin (which seems a bit inconsistent regarding which metadata it displays in the description of art tracks), but I was able to find the credits in the versions of these tracks on Spotify and they all looked correct (Jennifer Rush in the one case and Jon Bongiovi in the other).

[@Indigo_moon]

He never said covers are illegal. They are using the original's artists recording and claiming it to be their's.

[@regularperson4106]

If its so bad then why don't celine dion and her team do something about it????? if they don't, then its ok! Its up to the artist to actively activate the copyright, if he/she don't then thats a green light for other people to use their stuff. Its celine dion's fault not the other cover singers!

[@Andy_T79]

@regularperson4106 .... ah, so if a shop doesn't have cctv and isn't aware of some items being stolen, it's ok to just steal items! and it's the fault of the shop for not doing something about it?... your parents did a shameful job of raising you.

[@stoatystoat174]

Would also be interested for a legal opinion relating to 'Wings Of Pegasus - This is Huge' video about The Eagles Miming during concerts (which have crazy expensive tickets) Also think i should say that Wings Of Pegasus channel also has lots of videos where he is just showing great vocals in lots of detail with loads of love.

[@Scoots1994]

They are using the original artist's audio AND claiming it as their own recording and thus claiming other uses of the original recording.

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

That's what Fil assumed, but he was wrong, the audio is not Celine Dion's, it sounds completely different. And Vanny Viabola's cover does indeed credit Jennifer Rush as the songwriter for mechanical licensing purposes, so the songwriting royalties are going to the right place too.

[@PierreMasse-w4t]

Auto Tune and Pich correcting are ok to use in creating a record but they are not allow in a live competition shows.

[@pamelablume1637]

@@PierreMasse-w4t you are wrong. Pitch correction and auto tune ARE used in “live” competition shows.

[@VIPList]

🎯 Key points for quick navigation: 00:14 *🎤 Miss Krystle introduces her reaction to a video by Wings Of Pegasus, discussing alleged KZbin musical fraud involving fake TV appearances and music usage.* 02:17 *🎭 Individuals are using video editing to falsely appear on shows like America's Got Talent, misleading viewers into thinking they are watching genuine performances.* 03:40 *🚩 Fraudulent videos lack copyright claims, allowing unmonetized use of copyrighted content.* 04:06 *♻️ Discussion on the legality of using copyrighted music and imagery reveals the dual issues of copyright and trademark infringement.* 07:02 *🔄 Creators reverse video footage to evade content detection algorithms, raising issues around fair use and nominative fair use for commentary purposes.* 10:48 *💬 Viewer comments show confusion between genuine and fake performances, indicative of misleading content and lack of disclaimers.* 13:18 *💼 Potential copyright infringement leads to significant monetary damages, with statutory damages up to $150,000 per infringement.* 14:52 *🎶 Cover songs on KZbin don't usually get flagged due to agreements between major labels and the platform, emphasizing monetization over penalties.* 20:02 *🔎 Channels repeatedly exploiting this method to gain views and revenue, highlighting an ongoing issue on KZbin with lack of regulation.* 21:16 *🕵️ Fraud involves registering cover songs as original uploads, diverting ad revenue incorrectly without appropriate copyrights.* 22:53 *📈 Andre is using multiple KZbin channels to gain views by releasing similar content across them.* 23:20 *🚨 The audio registered on these videos is not authentic, raising legal concerns.* 24:15 *⚖️ Simply labeling content as a parody does not provide legal protection when using copyrighted material.* 25:24 *🎭 Thumbnails and video titles make false claims, misleading viewers for views.* 26:22 *🌍 Dealing with international copyright infringement involves complex legal processes.* 27:59 *🔍 Misleading content can lead to higher statutory damages due to willful infringement.* 29:09 *🍼 Using children in videos can be unnecessary and is a means to attract more viewers.* 30:48 *💸 Fraudulent use of pitch correction and autotune allows vocal manipulation, enhancing deception.* 34:10 *🎶 Pitch correction and false claims extend to family members' channels, increasing ad revenue.* 39:42 *🔗 Registering covers as original works and gaining ad revenue is a legal and ethical issue.* 42:51 *🛑 Covers need mechanical licenses; pretending to own the song infringes on copyright.* 45:07 *🔄 Repeated uploads of fake content gain substantial views and revenue from multiple channels.* 46:56 *🎶 Explaining the copyright claim process involves understanding that covering a song still requires acknowledging the original composition's ownership.* 47:11 *📜 To register a cover song, one must disclaim ownership of the underlying composition, recognizing it belongs to someone else.* 47:52 *🚩 None of the copyright claims viewed were legitimate, originating from bands or rightful ownership entities.* 48:32 *🔍 The lawyer plans to investigate further with publishing companies regarding fraudulent copyright claims.* 48:46 *⚖️ Trademark infringement issues include unauthorized use of names and logos from TV shows, potentially causing various legal claims.* 49:29 *💰 Unauthorized cover songs have generated significant profits, leaving rightful owners the ability to claim damages.* 49:42 *🌍 International borders complicate pursuing legal action against infringers who cause consumer confusion.* 50:11 *📞 The speaker requests audience action to contact Wings of Pegasus for a potential collaboration in music education.* 50:53 *🚨 Illicit activities on KZbin include navigating copyright strikes and channel deletions through prevalent infringement practices.*

[@jacquescousteau217]

Fils a standup guy. What he was talking about was the WRITERS and PUBLISHING . He wasn’t arguing was auto tune is uses, - too much - but that’s not illegal. Taking someone WRITERS claims, and PUBLISHING owners are ILLEGAL ! I’m not even going near the green screen. This creep should be in jail for fraud. YES I was a staff writer at one time, and session player. The music business is as corrupt as it gets … Love your look Krysta Esq.

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

Fil may be a standup guy, but he started off with a set of mistaken assumptions and proceeded to build them up into a video full of false allegations. Ms. Delgado did not fall into the same trap (likely doing some due diligence before "reacting" to his video). The song in the video is Vanny Viabola's cover, not Celine Dion's (which sounds completely different in every way), and Vanny does credit Jennifer Rush as the songwriter, so she didn't appropriate anything from anyone. (The video itself has copyright violations of the TV content and is potentially misleading in various ways, as Ms. Delgado points out, but Fil's other claims are bogus.)

[@nadialindley7696]

@@ModusVivendiMedia There are 2 songs by Vanny in the video...

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

@@nadialindley7696 Yes, Vanny Vabiola's covers of Jennifer Rush's "The Power of Love" and Jon Bongiovi and Richard Sambora's "Thank You For Loving Me". I just sometimes use only the one song as an example since my comments are too long already lol.

[@snihjen8470]

17:00 You completely missed the point, she isn't singing, this is Celine Dion's voice. This is not a cover-song. Edit: 18:40 NO, Celine isn't getting paid, that's the entire fucking issue. The youtuber is claiming personal ownership. 19:20 It's not a cover song. 22:05 You don't see what is going on here. 27:58 Trademark and Copyright are different things. 30:57 you are finally getting it. 31:09 and no, you aren't, 31:35 It is the actual guy, WingsOfPegasus just said so. 37:00 here we are, you finally put 2 and 2 togeather.

[@HonRevPTB]

No she didn't, she never put 2 & 2 together, how the hell did this woman pass the bar!?!?!? She did not understand these are not covers!!!!!!!

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

Except this is incorrect. This is the mistaken assumption that Fil made, resulting in a video full of false allegations. But Ms. Delgado (apparently having her due diligence before making her own reaction video), did not fall into the same trap. 1. The audio in the video "Simon Cowell Cried When The Heard Extraordinary Voice Singing The Power Of Love - Celine Dion" is Vanny Viabola's cover of Jennifer Rush's song "The Power of Love". (Content ID correctly identifies this, but I verified it separately.) 2. Vanny Viabola's cover of this song sounds NOTHING AT ALL like Celine Dion's cover of the same song. (Just listen to them side-by-side. Even the accent the words are sung in is completely different, as Celine Dion is French Canadian, and Vanny Viabola is Indonesian.) 3. Vanny Viabola properly credited Jennifer Rush as the songwriter for mechanical licensing purposes (which you can see on the song credits on Spotify), so the royalties should all be going to the proper places.

[@rizaisme]

Wrong! Vanny once covered the song The Power of Love and the sound in the video clip was taken from that cover.

[@joecotter6803]

Vanni didn't do a cover. She mimed to Celine Dion's performance. As a lawyer you should know this. She impersonated Celine.

[@unyeda3696]

WIH TELINGAMU TIDAK BISA MEMBEDAKAN SUARA CELINE DAN VANNY

[@rizaisme]

Of course she did. You can search it on youtube. The sound on the first video clip is taken from her cover not celine dion's voice.

[@partickthompson1164]

Wow you finally said what he was talking about You can’t lip sync a song and call it your own work. Thats exactly what Vanni and the other person were doing. They try to get around this by doing a cover and then claiming the original song is theirs. .

[@ghetifal]

Vanny is an established artist and sang her own version. The youtubers on the other hand were lip-syncing to Vanny. Vanny is being defrauded here. I think because they both look Southeast Asian and wear headcoverings, people are confusing the youtube fraud's wife and Vanni? Whatever the reasons, there is some crazy group think here unable to acknowledge that Fil made a mistake. And that's not an insult. Everyone makes mistakes. I'm still a Fil fan. However, if he doesn't clarify all the hate he's caused towards Vanny over his mistake, I would have to start questioning his integrity.

[@inthefar-queue6270]

All these "artists" are thieves and scam artists. They should all be charged with theft and offences under the Copyright Act. All the moneys they have "earned" should be siezed and sent to the correct copyright holders. The KZbin algorithm did not pick these up because the "America's Got Talent" scene was reversed. KZbin should correct this forthwith and kick these thieves off KZbin. They had no right to do what they did, their motivation was greed, and the situation needs to be rectified in favour of the copyright holder as soon as possible.

[@TE5LA-GAMING]

I don't understand how they can fake these and use the original track for the entire song and not get flagged. If I upload an original video only 15 seconds long but it has music playing, it gets flagged instantly. I've also uploaded 30-second scenes from TV episodes to comment about show, and it is blocked instantly, yet you can find full episodes that have been on KZbin for years. It's also okay for women to show full frontal nudity as long as they say it is for "educational purposes."

[@watzizname]

I believe it's because they've used some sort of pitch correction on their live version to bring it up to match the levels of the original artist audio. They then register their adjusted live version with You Tube, so the system will have their adjusted audio for reference. Next they proceed to dub their mimed performance with the original artist audio instead of their own, and because their adjusted audio is close enough to the original artist levels, it fools You Tube's system into allowing it as the fraudsters own work. Essentially You Tube's automated methods of detecting such audio fraud are fooled by pitch correction into believing the original artist audio used on the video is in fact the fraudsters own live version, because the analysed levels of the two versions now match. That's my understanding of it anyway.

[@NoNotAChance]

I would have thought a music lawyer could possibly distinguish the difference between a cover song and using the artists voice in a reproduction. It is interesting reading the comments and those defending the 'artist' because I would like to know which version they are comparing with this. In my music collection I have more than 4 different versions recorded by Celine and I expect there are possibly more than a dozen versions out there - not to mention literally hundreds of live performances that have been captured over the years.

[@ghetifal]

I would have thought a self-claimed fan of Celine Dion would have a better ear than a random lawyer for recognizing if a voice was Celine's or not :D That isn't Celine my man. It's Vanny. And that song isn't originally written and recorded by Celine anyways. I'm a fan of Celine Dion. And a fan of Wings of Pegasus. But that recording is so clearly not Celine that it doesn't take a deep sound wave analysis to figure out.

[@Randgalf]

The whole section where Fil's pointing out very clearly how these youtubers are trying to claim other artists' songs as their own in order to in turn claim copyright on other videos where the songs are used, why didn't you pick up on that instead of trying to make it out as if he claimed it to be "illegal to do cover songs"?

[@flwrfan1752]

How do the people doing this have the darn nerve to pass off a great voice like the late Bobby Hatfield’s as their own or any of the other great singers they are trying to pass off as their own?

[@ralphditchburn1456]

Many years ago, when telus put in one of their commercials a lizard that was multi coloured and changing form, i complained i dont like reality and made animals objects interchangeable, i gave the example what if they show people playing with bears, jumping off buildings, so kids believe it can be done and so die immitating, can i sày telus? Lol

[@webuyart]

The song was not a "cover" of the song "The Power of Love" it was the actual Celine Dion recording being used in the video. FIl's commentary isn't that hard to following. You simply can not take someone else's recording, claim it as our own and collect revenue from it. Fil is right on point on this.

[@DodonaWind]

If you're a music attorney, how do you not recognize that the first 3 songs being played are the ACTUAL songs, not covers? I would assume you chose music law because you loved music. Céline's voice is so iconic and recognizable, so it's blatantly obvious that it's actually her voice and not a well done cover.

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

Because she has ears, apparently did some due diligence before making her video (which Fil apparently did not), and recognizes that they are NOT Celine Dion's versions of the songs. They don't even sound remotely close (down to the lack of Celine's French Canadian accent).

[@ronisin710]

Vani did NOT do a cover. That's Celine Dion's voice.

[@KyleWalz]

You may mention this, but many musicians don't distinguish copyright pertaining to the song itself and the audio version. When you cover, you make a different audio version which has its own copyright but the melody and lyrics are under a different copyright. Correct me if wrong there. EDIT: right after I commented you said this in the video. :)

[@Douglas.Scott.McCarron]

I think a big fallacy in the music business is that most music is owned by the composer. Often their contract screws them and their manager sells the music to a publishing company without asking the artist (who was often high and didn't care) and then the publishing company sells it to a large music aggregator who then owns the melody and the produced record, who then can reuse them as they want and make new songs by getting another musician to record their owned melodies and music. So it isn't illegal if this happens. The big myth is that the music business is about musicians. It is about lawyers and labels. Musicians are just the product, like the latest soft drink. And it isn't worth the labels and lawyers time to chase some one that probably doesn't have a lot of money. But as a musician, I am also pissed off about all this. That is why I no longer make music or put it out.

[@williamwallace2325]

Good info to share, bro! Any related info would be welcome. Thx. And another great video by our favorite attorney/singer! GREAT!

[@Douglas.Scott.McCarron]

@@williamwallace2325 The Golden Rule - those with the Gold, RULE. Talent is here to be turned into addicts and alcoholics to manipulate and take their music, though of course the ones with the Gold pay for the records. If you make some money from it, don't spend it, don't get drunk and drug. Do like Shakira says " we are here to manipulate each other to make money". Dreams are to sell to customers, not talent.

[@kirkwilson6229]

This isn't about covers or interpolations. This is about claiming other's work as your own.

[@Douglas.Scott.McCarron]

@@kirkwilson6229 It isn't yours if your manager sold it to someone else.

[@averyintelligence]

music is owned by the composer, by default. Only people who CHOOSE to sign their rights away have publishers own their work. Nobody HAS to do sign a deal, you can just sign up to a publisher admin and retain all ownership. but people CHOOSE to sign publishing deals because they WANT money from the publisher. seems like a relatively fair deal most times, considering its a risk on the publishers side. If you want a lot of money/advance then you have to offer some value in return and the value is your song i mean u said it yourself "who was often high and didnt care". yeah if you dont care about your own business then people will exploit you. On the other hand theres artists who do care, like dolly parton and michael jackson. so its really the artist who is to blame. not saying i dont feel empathetic towards them but its not unjust at all. use paul mccartney as an example... who was to blame for him losing his publishing? The real answer is himself. Nobody owed him anything. HE DID NOT CARE AT THE TIME. cos he failed to educate himself on the subject

[@metalgynoid]

I have a question about remastering. If I take a very old song from the 70's and remaster it in a way that brings out certain instruments in more clarity and "crispness" with gain and added lower frequency improvements that make it sound as though it was possibly recorded in 2020, then upload it to KZbin stating that it's my remastered upgrade to the sound quality, while of course giving credit to the original artist, how illegal is that? (mega-long sentence there)

[@helge666]

"The Power of Love" is originally from Jennifer Rush, Celine Dion covered it herself.

[@UK_Lemons]

Correct but CD did not claim it was her song and the publisher and writers would get their share of income.

[@ModusVivendiMedia]

@@UK_Lemons Neither did Vanny Viabola. (You can see in the song credits of her cover of this song on Spotify that she does credit Jennifer Rush as the songwriter.)

[@mrhistorybuff]

I am with Fil. Pitch correction is awful. It is even worse when it is oversaturated as an effect.

[@artisticvisions77]

I googled it. You can not monetize a cover song on youtube without the permission of the original song copyright holder.

[@minners71]

You call yourself a lawyer and get the absolute fundamentals wrong, Fil never said it's illegal to do covers. FFS!

[@ghetifal]

She was reacting as she listened to what he was saying. She was confused because Fil thought that the Vanny recording was Celine. Since she could tell it wasn't Celine, I think she just underestimated how off Fil was. It sounded like Fil thought it was illegal to do covers because he was so upset about Vanny's covers getting credited. The real issue is that Fil had no idea how youtube audio identification works.

[@oreoandoz7723]

Hearing that it can be difficult to prosecute or recover damages with (alleged) international "scammers" means, to me, that KZbin needs to try A LOT HARDER to prevent this kind of copyright abuse. Prevention is a better remedy than prosecution. KZbin is NOT doing enough to meet its responsibility to artists and genuine creators.

[@KaaSerpent]

I can't tell if you got Fil's point that "Andry" IS, in fact, using the original music and claiming it's his own. He has not covered anything.

[@ghetifal]

She is agreeing with Fil on that point, but she is correcting Fil in pointing out that Vanny has nothing to do with the scam. Vanny is the one who's content is being appropriated by the scammers. Fil thought that it was a recording of Celine without double checking. He was wrong. And he would recognize in less than five seconds if he took the time to compare Vanny to Celine. Unfortunately many of his his fans don't have his ears, and so they can't tell the difference even AFTER having it pointed out.

[@jefffather4663]

I'm disappointed that 18 min in, Miss Krystle did not understand the singer and song is the ORIGINAL of Dion. It is NOT a cover!!! I'm still watching to see when she will actually get it. These are NOT covers! They are the original artists...original studio release! How do you not recognize the vocal is not a cover? wow....she's too young to not know that was the original Air Supply singer and song.

[@solracsnad9979]

Vanny wasn't "covering." She was lip-syncing Celine. You have completely missed the point. (Your did at cover need a mechanical license alone is irrelevant!)

[@ghetifal]

Vanny doesn't appear visually in any of these videos. You have completely missed the point. Vanny is an established artist whose music was appropriated by scammers for these videos. When I first watched Fil's video, I got the impression that Vanny was a scammer, and its clear I'm not the only one who got that impression. Fil really should do a clarification video if he has integrity. He's unwittingly sent out hordes of mindless cult members, which is ironic since so often he does analysis videos to vindicate people who are shouted out by mindless groupthink for pointing out pitch correction.

[@terrycupp6687]

First time watching your channel and I was pleasantly surprised to see you analyzing Fil Henley’s channel (Wings of Pegasus). Just wanted to thank you for the clear, legal explanations of what Fil is trying to impart ❤

[@TopMusicAttorney]

Thanks for the support and kind words.

[@jamesshavrnoch8665]

It is easy to understand what Fil is saying... I'm 6 minutes into the video and I don't understand what the hosts argument is... defending or dissenting...

[@ghetifal]

The point is that what Fil is saying is wrong. I think she's confused because she underestimates how wrong Fil is. I don't think she realizes that Fil actually thinks that Celine's voice is being used in that video that ripped of Vanny's audio. I don't think she realizes that Fil thinks KZbin's audio recognition is actually like a "composition owner" tag or something. While she may not fully understand the incorrect things Fil is saying, at the end of the day she presents accurate statements about what's happening here. The youtube scammers are doing illegal things on so many levels, but there is nothing shady going on with the artists who's covers were approriated (like Vanny)

[@claymiller8171]

If a person is using someone else's original copyrighted recording(s) or video(s) without permission or authorization of the creator/ artist and that person putting their name and face on it, claiming it as their's and profiting from it, it looks like an act of piracy to me.

[@chrisvickers7928]

They are not covering, they are miming the original.

[@tr5947]

She's not doing a cover; she's lip syncing over Celine Dion's actual recording. ETA: The things about pitch correction is because Fil's channel is based on analyzing whether the performances we see are the product of natural talent or if it's manipulation. It might make most people shrug the shoulders and say "So what?", but if there's not an issue with this, why was there an issue with "Milli Vanilli"? There's nothing wrong if people aren't being misled into thinking what they're seeing is the actual natural talent of the persons. Would anyone think it's legitimate if I got on stage and mimed playing guitar to a recorded Eric Clapton solo, or I used pitch correction to make my guitar sound the right notes no matter my lack of knowledge or ability to really play? Perhaps we're going to rewrite and rethink what constitutes "performance", and maybe 50 years from now such a thing will be accepted as such, but is that artistry, or just entertainment pretending to be artistry?