I understand, there is a lot of confusion and mis-information about copyrights.
Here is some info that may help others:
How do so many YouTube channels get away with monetizing videos that break copyright laws?
from here:
https://www.quora.com/How-do-so-many-YouTube-channels-get-away-with-monetizing-videos-that-break-copyright-lawsThere are a LOT of presumptions in this question.
First, most YouTubers don’t make “plenty of money” on ad revenue unless they have a significant number of subscribers and views.
Secondly, “clearly owned” is fine if they have permission, such as through licensing arrangements. In the case of the specific channel you mention, they do have 1.8 million subscribers, BUT they obviously have licensing arrangements (in coordination with their companion website) with the movie production companies to distribute their trailers. As long as their use of the content is licensed, there is no copyright violation.
Copyright doesn’t mean that nobody can copy or distribute it; it means that the copyright owner gets to decide where and how their content gets distributed. When a copyright owner licenses specific people or organizations to use their content under specific terms, that’s exactly how it’s supposed to work, because it keeps them in control of how their creative work gets distributed (and typically they will get revenue - in the form of either a license subscription or royalty payment - from that licensed use).
Further, when you see ads on YouTube videos, frequently it means the copyright owner has chosen to monetize the content (i.e., the owner of the copyrighted content is profiting from it, NOT the YouTube channel owner).* If a YouTube channel owner chooses to monetize their videos, they can only do so when it’s their own content; as soon as any content is flagged as a match under YouTube’s ContentID system, that option is removed and the verified rights owner can choose to implement any one of several remedies, which can include having the video taken down, stripping it of the infringing content, or monetizing it. Many choose the latter because it’s economically advantageous for them to do so (it’s far easier and less expensive to allow the infringement and collect revenue on it than to sue the infringer in court). A significant number of the examples you’re likely seeing are examples where they’re doing just that.
Lastly, the primary purpose of a film trailer is to promote a movie. Why on earth would a movie studio object to their trailer being shared, uploaded, and distributed as much and as often as possible (or worse, try to stop that)? After all, the more widely it’s shared, the more people view the movie, and so the more money they make! And with a site like this one that aggregates and distributes movie trailers, now they even make money off of the trailers, too!
* I wish YouTube would explain this or make it clearer, because it causes a lot of confusion!
******************************************************
One more found here:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.belmont.edu/legal/pdf/Public-Domain-Chart.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiolP_esrf1AhUlkIkEHaVICmgQFnoECAQQBg&usg=AOvVaw10OAygNad0u1zosHPRoWH8Generally, if something was published before 1923, it is in the public domain. If it was an unpublished work and the author died over 70 years ago, it is in the public domain. If was written by an anonymous author over 120 years ago, it is in the public domain.
