It's nothing spectacular and it was just some video I had kicking about and it isn't that bad to just delete it. Anyway, I tried to spice it up a bit with some music. Vivaldi - Four Seasons Spring seemed to be a great fit for this video. So I found a copy of this track (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:01_-_Vivaldi_Spring_mvt_1_Allegro_-_John_Harrison_violin.ogg), licensed by Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 1.0 Generic (License available here http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/1.0/deed.en) and finished my video, uploaded it and all was good. I monitized it and that was that. I doubt it ever made a penny from the monitization but I'll never know as that was before the youtube revamp to list Ad Revenue per video. That isn't important anyway.
Some time later it was flagged as "Matched third party content" and the claim was made by CD Baby. At the time I just set the video to private and decided to deal with it later. Later came, about a week and a half ago when I filed my dispute with this claim. I cited the source and license of the music and the claim was released. I tried to enable monitization again on the video and CD Baby claimed ownership, again. So I disputed it again and it was released again. I tried to enable monitization again and this time an anonymous "Rights collecting society" claimed ownership. So once again I disputed the claim and it was released. Once I tried to enable monitization again it was then claimed by APM Music and again I disputed the claim. Turned monitization on again and had another claim for ownership of the music filed. This time by the Harry Fox Agency.
So here I am, 5 disputes into this one video and every time I dispute it another claim is filed.
It does leave me with some questions:
a) Why are claims submitted one by one by different companies?
b) My dispute has been accepted once and nothing has changed in my video - why do I need to submit it again and again for each company?
c) Why is the company involved the only one reviewing these claims?
