What do you do when someone wants you to add their audiojungle music to a video?

[uk1000]

What do you do when someone wants you to add their audiojungle music to a video, where they bought it with the standard license? Surely that would give them permission to use that audio for 1 end product but not me. Correct?

What if they don’t want to cover the additional cost? What would you do? Cancel or purchase at additional expense (even though I’d probably have to buy it twice to cover 2 versions of the same video - with each a different aspect ratio so I assume it would be 2 different end products, where each purchase is only licensed for 1) or is there some alternative?

[coerdelion]

No idea what you should do … but it seems like you’re between a rock and a hard place …

Do you actually offer that service? If you don’t then, perhaps contacting CS to cancel …?

[uk1000]

No idea what you should do … but it seems like you’re between a rock and a hard place …

Do you actually offer that service? If you don’t then, perhaps contacting CS to cancel …?

Do you actually offer that service?

Not adding audio from that site and I mentioned it before he ordered about the licenses and that I couldn’t add something that was licensed only to him. I sent the videos (same vid, different formats) with 2 royalty free tracks (as it was an 11 min video) and sent short sections of the video with 3 other royalty free tracks for him to pick from since he didn’t really like the first that much.

I think I’ll probably ask CS to cancel. Or if I purchased it (2 of them - one for each format of the video) I’d probably be left with a $2 profit once Fiverr takes the 20% - that’s if the site doesn’t add anything else apart from what it shows - if they do I could make a loss. I also don’t know about transferring the license. Maybe it’s just easier to get CS to cancel it. Thanks.

[cyaxrex]

What do you do when someone wants you to add their audiojungle music to a video, where they bought it with the standard license? Surely that would give them permission to use that audio for 1 end product but not me. Correct?

What if they don’t want to cover the additional cost? What would you do? Cancel or purchase at additional expense (even though I’d probably have to buy it twice to cover 2 versions of the same video - with each a different aspect ratio so I assume it would be 2 different end products, where each purchase is only licensed for 1) or is there some alternative?

Surely that would give them permission to use that audio for 1 end product but not me . Correct?

If your buyer has come to you to create 1 video and bought 1 audio jungle sound track to go with this video, there is no reason for you to buy a license also. You are creating the 1 end product your buyer bought the track for. You would only need to buy a license if you plan on using the track in other works.

You are creating a product by creating a video. However, you are providing a service by adding a track your buyer has provided to that video. You can clarify this in your delivery message and you can deliver a video without audio as your official delivery, followed by a video version with audio attached as a message. You simply say that the track (sourced by your buyer) has been added FOC.

[uk1000]

Surely that would give them permission to use that audio for 1 end product but not me . Correct?

If your buyer has come to you to create 1 video and bought 1 audio jungle sound track to go with this video, there is no reason for you to buy a license also. You are creating the 1 end product your buyer bought the track for. You would only need to buy a license if you plan on using the track in other works.

You are creating a product by creating a video. However, you are providing a service by adding a track your buyer has provided to that video. You can clarify this in your delivery message and you can deliver a video without audio as your official delivery, followed by a video version with audio attached as a message. You simply say that the track (sourced by your buyer) has been added FOC.

The site says:

No. You can’t license items and then make them available to others ‘as-is’ (that is, as a stand-alone item or as stock), regardless of which license you purchase.

And:

I’m a freelancer/agency. Can I use the item for an end product I’m doing for a client?

Yes. You’re essentially buying the file on your client’s behalf…be sure to link your client to our licenses and delete the item itself from your computer.

And

Can multiple people within my company have access to the item?

Yes. If you purchased a single-use license, access should only be given to people working on the single end product incorporating that item

I can’t see where it says a buyer of music file+license for 1 end product can give it to some other freelancer who is not part of their company to create the end product with. And would a video in 2 different aspect ratios (2 videos delivered - different aspect ratio versions of the same edited source) be classed as 2 end products or 1 (and so need 2 licenses)?

The only bit about a freelancer and the client is where it says the freelancer would “essentially [be] buying the file on your client’s behalf.”. Also how does the transfer of licenses work if I’d do that - would it be okay with Fiverr’s TOS and would there be offsite contact details sent?

[cyaxrex]

The site says:

No. You can’t license items and then make them available to others ‘as-is’ (that is, as a stand-alone item or as stock), regardless of which license you purchase.

And:

I’m a freelancer/agency. Can I use the item for an end product I’m doing for a client?

Yes. You’re essentially buying the file on your client’s behalf…be sure to link your client to our licenses and delete the item itself from your computer.

And

Can multiple people within my company have access to the item?

Yes. If you purchased a single-use license, access should only be given to people working on the single end product incorporating that item

I can’t see where it says a buyer of music file+license for 1 end product can give it to some other freelancer who is not part of their company to create the end product with. And would a video in 2 different aspect ratios (2 videos delivered - different aspect ratio versions of the same edited source) be classed as 2 end products or 1 (and so need 2 licenses)?

The only bit about a freelancer and the client is where it says the freelancer would “essentially [be] buying the file on your client’s behalf.”. Also how does the transfer of licenses work if I’d do that - would it be okay with Fiverr’s TOS and would there be offsite contact details sent?

The site says:

No. You can’t license items and then make them available to others ‘as-is’ (that is, as a stand-alone item or as stock), regardless of which license you purchase.

No one is making the license for the track available to others. This implies that it is being distributed with the intention that those receiving it will use it in their own projects.

This is like someone hiring a web designer to create a website that they provide stock images they would like to feature on it. The seller does not need to go and buy licences for the same images. They are being used to create one single end product that is the website the client intended the images to be used on.

And:

I’m a freelancer/agency. Can I use the item for an end product I’m doing for a client?

Yes. You’re essentially buying the file on your client’s behalf…be sure to link your client to our licenses and delete the item itself from your computer.

This doesn’t apply to you. You are not buying this music track. Your buyer has already.

And

Can multiple people within my company have access to the item?

Yes. If you purchased a single-use license, access should only be given to people working on the single end product incorporating that item

This is just reiterating that your buyer has the right to give people working on their end prodict access to the track in question.

I can’t see where it says a buyer of music file+license for 1 end product can give it to some other freelancer who is not part of their company to create the end product with.

Neither can I see the part where it says that a buyer of a file+license for one end product can turn to their wife and say, "hey honey, you are good at syncing video and audio, can you edit this track to my new promo video?"

Nor can I see the part where it says a buyer can have a temp from an employment agency help them add their track to an end product, or an unpaid intern or school kid getting work experience in the office.

Also how does the transfer of licenses work if I’d do that

You haven’t had a license transferred to you that you need to transfer. Your buyer has the license. As for creating 2 videos with different aspect ratios, this may be debatable but if its the same video, it should still be covered by 1 license.

You seem to be turning a molehill into a mountain complete with a fancy medieval citadel and complex system of mines and secret tunnels here. In either case, it’s not your job to be an audio jungle license enforcement agent.

Deliver as I have suggested above to keep the music track off your live portfolio. (I don’t think you need to do this, but I don’t want you to lose sleep for the next 5-years.) If delivering the same video in 2-aspect ratios, maybe add a delivery note saying that your buyer might want to make sure that their existing license covers both. If it doesn’t, they can then buy another.

[misscrystal]

The site says:

No. You can’t license items and then make them available to others ‘as-is’ (that is, as a stand-alone item or as stock), regardless of which license you purchase.

No one is making the license for the track available to others. This implies that it is being distributed with the intention that those receiving it will use it in their own projects.

This is like someone hiring a web designer to create a website that they provide stock images they would like to feature on it. The seller does not need to go and buy licences for the same images. They are being used to create one single end product that is the website the client intended the images to be used on.

And:

I’m a freelancer/agency. Can I use the item for an end product I’m doing for a client?

Yes. You’re essentially buying the file on your client’s behalf…be sure to link your client to our licenses and delete the item itself from your computer.

This doesn’t apply to you. You are not buying this music track. Your buyer has already.

And

Can multiple people within my company have access to the item?

Yes. If you purchased a single-use license, access should only be given to people working on the single end product incorporating that item

This is just reiterating that your buyer has the right to give people working on their end prodict access to the track in question.

I can’t see where it says a buyer of music file+license for 1 end product can give it to some other freelancer who is not part of their company to create the end product with.

Neither can I see the part where it says that a buyer of a file+license for one end product can turn to their wife and say, "hey honey, you are good at syncing video and audio, can you edit this track to my new promo video?"

Nor can I see the part where it says a buyer can have a temp from an employment agency help them add their track to an end product, or an unpaid intern or school kid getting work experience in the office.

Also how does the transfer of licenses work if I’d do that

You haven’t had a license transferred to you that you need to transfer. Your buyer has the license. As for creating 2 videos with different aspect ratios, this may be debatable but if its the same video, it should still be covered by 1 license.

You seem to be turning a molehill into a mountain complete with a fancy medieval citadel and complex system of mines and secret tunnels here. In either case, it’s not your job to be an audio jungle license enforcement agent.

Deliver as I have suggested above to keep the music track off your live portfolio. (I don’t think you need to do this, but I don’t want you to lose sleep for the next 5-years.) If delivering the same video in 2-aspect ratios, maybe add a delivery note saying that your buyer might want to make sure that their existing license covers both. If it doesn’t, they can then buy another.

You seem to be turning a molehill into a mountain complete with a fancy medieval citadel and complex system of mines and secret tunnels here.

Why should something be simple and easy to understand, if you can turn it into a huge complicated convoluted mishmash?

[uk1000]

You seem to be turning a molehill into a mountain complete with a fancy medieval citadel and complex system of mines and secret tunnels here.

Why should something be simple and easy to understand, if you can turn it into a huge complicated convoluted mishmash?

Why should something be simple and easy to understand…

Because it doesn’t say I’m licensed to do that on their site/license page as far as I can see.

And because delivering something (or even 2 since that’s what needs to be delivered) without the correct licensing could mean my account gets closed by Fiverr (2 of the same types of warnings - if given can close the account, as I’m sure you know).

The Fiverr TOS also says “Sellers represent and warrant that they hold a valid license to use such music…”. Whereas it’s the buyer (not me) who holds the single use license for the music they want to use (for 1 end product).

[cyaxrex]

Why should something be simple and easy to understand…

Because it doesn’t say I’m licensed to do that on their site/license page as far as I can see.

And because delivering something (or even 2 since that’s what needs to be delivered) without the correct licensing could mean my account gets closed by Fiverr (2 of the same types of warnings - if given can close the account, as I’m sure you know).

The Fiverr TOS also says “Sellers represent and warrant that they hold a valid license to use such music…”. Whereas it’s the buyer (not me) who holds the single use license for the music they want to use (for 1 end product).

Just cancel the order already.

[misscrystal]

Yes cancel it. You didn’t need to ask apparently since you already know the answer. You’re right to wonder about all this of course… But the answer to me seems pretty straightforward. Cy explained it well. Since you have it figured out on your own to your satisfaction then it’s best to cancel it.

If someone buys an audiojungle track and wants to hire someone to attach it to their video then they have the license they need. The one who does the job doesn’t need a license.

I like Cy’s solution of doing it free.

[cyaxrex]

Yes cancel it. You didn’t need to ask apparently since you already know the answer. You’re right to wonder about all this of course… But the answer to me seems pretty straightforward. Cy explained it well. Since you have it figured out on your own to your satisfaction then it’s best to cancel it.

If someone buys an audiojungle track and wants to hire someone to attach it to their video then they have the license they need. The one who does the job doesn’t need a license.

I like Cy’s solution of doing it free.

But the answer to me seems pretty straightforward.

It is. I can’t even see what the problem is. Most social media platforms and apps convert or display videos at different aspect ratios automatically. In this case, I don’t understand why the OP thinks audio jungle is going to break down the door and come in with a SWAT team if he creates 2 aspect ratios of the SAME video.

Neither am I getting the licensing transfer issue. In fact, I can’t understand how you can offer a video editing gig with this mentality. In theory, this makes it necessary for anyone working with video to only start work after verifying that buyers hold legitimate licenses for all assets they supply to sellers.

I can’t even understand how the OP knows their buyer has music from audio jungle unless the track has a watermark. However, that would mean the track can’t be used legally. Possibly, this is the case here and all this is really the biggest knicker twist of the century… :thinking:

[misscrystal]

But the answer to me seems pretty straightforward.

It is. I can’t even see what the problem is. Most social media platforms and apps convert or display videos at different aspect ratios automatically. In this case, I don’t understand why the OP thinks audio jungle is going to break down the door and come in with a SWAT team if he creates 2 aspect ratios of the SAME video.

Neither am I getting the licensing transfer issue. In fact, I can’t understand how you can offer a video editing gig with this mentality. In theory, this makes it necessary for anyone working with video to only start work after verifying that buyers hold legitimate licenses for all assets they supply to sellers.

I can’t even understand how the OP knows their buyer has music from audio jungle unless the track has a watermark. However, that would mean the track can’t be used legally. Possibly, this is the case here and all this is really the biggest knicker twist of the century… :thinking:

I can’t understand how you can offer a video editing gig with this mentality.

I was just thinking this. Imagine going through all this mentally each time someone hires you.

[uk1000]

But the answer to me seems pretty straightforward.

It is. I can’t even see what the problem is. Most social media platforms and apps convert or display videos at different aspect ratios automatically. In this case, I don’t understand why the OP thinks audio jungle is going to break down the door and come in with a SWAT team if he creates 2 aspect ratios of the SAME video.

Neither am I getting the licensing transfer issue. In fact, I can’t understand how you can offer a video editing gig with this mentality. In theory, this makes it necessary for anyone working with video to only start work after verifying that buyers hold legitimate licenses for all assets they supply to sellers.

I can’t even understand how the OP knows their buyer has music from audio jungle unless the track has a watermark. However, that would mean the track can’t be used legally. Possibly, this is the case here and all this is really the biggest knicker twist of the century… :thinking:

I can’t even see what the problem is. Most social media platforms and apps convert or display videos at different aspect ratios automatically

The buyer wants a version that can be displayed on youtube with no black bars/pillarbox bars on the sides. The video was given in 16:9 with but with a 1:1 aspect ratio of the picture area and pillarbox bars at the sides.

From youtube:

For some video and device aspects ratios like 9:16 vertical videos on computer browsers, YouTube may add more padding for optimal viewing. The padding is white by default, and dark gray when Dark theme is turned on.

It’s what the buyer wants, so I’m giving a 1:1 version and also a 16:9 version scaled & cropped depending on the shot (some of the picture on top or bottom of the frame cropped out of that version). I think the 1:1 version is better as that keeps everything but the buyer wants both.

I can’t understand how you can offer a video editing gig

I have a video editing gig (which is set more expensive so I can mostly use it for sending offers eg. to BR rather than it being bought directly). The gig ordered was compositing/fx (adding graphics in this case is the main bit + some sound fx) which almost never needs any music/audio adding. But when I need to add music/sound fx to a video I add my own that I know I have the rights to.

I can’t even understand how the OP knows their buyer has music from audio jungle unless the track has a watermark.

It doesn’t have a watermark. I knew before downloading it because “audiojungle” was the first part of the zip file name, and the buyer linked to the product page and screenshot-ed the product page to highlight the license info.

[misscrystal]

I can’t even see what the problem is. Most social media platforms and apps convert or display videos at different aspect ratios automatically

The buyer wants a version that can be displayed on youtube with no black bars/pillarbox bars on the sides. The video was given in 16:9 with but with a 1:1 aspect ratio of the picture area and pillarbox bars at the sides.

From youtube:

For some video and device aspects ratios like 9:16 vertical videos on computer browsers, YouTube may add more padding for optimal viewing. The padding is white by default, and dark gray when Dark theme is turned on.

It’s what the buyer wants, so I’m giving a 1:1 version and also a 16:9 version scaled & cropped depending on the shot (some of the picture on top or bottom of the frame cropped out of that version). I think the 1:1 version is better as that keeps everything but the buyer wants both.

I can’t understand how you can offer a video editing gig

I have a video editing gig (which is set more expensive so I can mostly use it for sending offers eg. to BR rather than it being bought directly). The gig ordered was compositing/fx (adding graphics in this case is the main bit + some sound fx) which almost never needs any music/audio adding. But when I need to add music/sound fx to a video I add my own that I know I have the rights to.

I can’t even understand how the OP knows their buyer has music from audio jungle unless the track has a watermark.

It doesn’t have a watermark. I knew before downloading it because “audiojungle” was the first part of the zip file name, and the buyer linked to the product page and screenshot-ed the product page to highlight the license info.

Are you going to cancel or are you going to buy another license? Did you discuss this with your client?

[frank_d]

I can’t even see what the problem is. Most social media platforms and apps convert or display videos at different aspect ratios automatically

The buyer wants a version that can be displayed on youtube with no black bars/pillarbox bars on the sides. The video was given in 16:9 with but with a 1:1 aspect ratio of the picture area and pillarbox bars at the sides.

From youtube:

For some video and device aspects ratios like 9:16 vertical videos on computer browsers, YouTube may add more padding for optimal viewing. The padding is white by default, and dark gray when Dark theme is turned on.

It’s what the buyer wants, so I’m giving a 1:1 version and also a 16:9 version scaled & cropped depending on the shot (some of the picture on top or bottom of the frame cropped out of that version). I think the 1:1 version is better as that keeps everything but the buyer wants both.

I can’t understand how you can offer a video editing gig

I have a video editing gig (which is set more expensive so I can mostly use it for sending offers eg. to BR rather than it being bought directly). The gig ordered was compositing/fx (adding graphics in this case is the main bit + some sound fx) which almost never needs any music/audio adding. But when I need to add music/sound fx to a video I add my own that I know I have the rights to.

I can’t even understand how the OP knows their buyer has music from audio jungle unless the track has a watermark.

It doesn’t have a watermark. I knew before downloading it because “audiojungle” was the first part of the zip file name, and the buyer linked to the product page and screenshot-ed the product page to highlight the license info.

I stopped reading after a while, especially when you dived into aspect ratios, but the audiojungle issue is NOT an issue.

The client licensed the track for one end product and they hand you the wav/mp3 so you can make said end product.

They are not handing off the license to you or offering the item up for sale.

And 2 different aspect ratio deliveries still count as the same end product.

[uk1000]

I stopped reading after a while, especially when you dived into aspect ratios, but the audiojungle issue is NOT an issue.

The client licensed the track for one end product and they hand you the wav/mp3 so you can make said end product.

They are not handing off the license to you or offering the item up for sale.

And 2 different aspect ratio deliveries still count as the same end product.

Thanks. I’ll add it to both versions of the video.

I assume that’s okay with “variations of a single application” that is in a license FAQ. Also in the FAQ it says “You only need to purchase the item once per series.” (eg. if it’s used for a whole TV series), assuming that’s the correct section and relevant to the product/license bought. But at least, as you say, it should be okay for both versions of the same video so I’ll use if for that thanks.

[frank_d]

Thanks. I’ll add it to both versions of the video.

I assume that’s okay with “variations of a single application” that is in a license FAQ. Also in the FAQ it says “You only need to purchase the item once per series.” (eg. if it’s used for a whole TV series), assuming that’s the correct section and relevant to the product/license bought. But at least, as you say, it should be okay for both versions of the same video so I’ll use if for that thanks.

Yes. A single end product could be a series.

Or the same intro used on all of the client’s product videos.

It’s fairly simple as far as license terms go.

[misscrystal]

Thanks. I’ll add it to both versions of the video.

I assume that’s okay with “variations of a single application” that is in a license FAQ. Also in the FAQ it says “You only need to purchase the item once per series.” (eg. if it’s used for a whole TV series), assuming that’s the correct section and relevant to the product/license bought. But at least, as you say, it should be okay for both versions of the same video so I’ll use if for that thanks.

Why is it that if Frank says it’s ok you listen but not to others? This wasn’t difficult to see, even without Frank’s expertise.

[uk1000]

Why is it that if Frank says it’s ok you listen but not to others? This wasn’t difficult to see, even without Frank’s expertise.

I listened to everyone. Frank’s post confirmed it so I was more sure. I was reading up on the license re: for 2 versions of the same video. It’s better to be safe than get in trouble/account closed for not having the right license/doing something against the TOS. Also in posts previously by cyaxrex it wasn’t totally clear about the 2 versions of the same video so I wan’t totally sure about that. Form cyaxrex’s post:

As for creating 2 videos with different aspect ratios, this may be debatable but if its the same video, it should still be covered by 1 license.

[misscrystal]

I listened to everyone. Frank’s post confirmed it so I was more sure. I was reading up on the license re: for 2 versions of the same video. It’s better to be safe than get in trouble/account closed for not having the right license/doing something against the TOS. Also in posts previously by cyaxrex it wasn’t totally clear about the 2 versions of the same video so I wan’t totally sure about that. Form cyaxrex’s post:

As for creating 2 videos with different aspect ratios, this may be debatable but if its the same video, it should still be covered by 1 license.

Maybe you could join Franks mentoring group so you can go to the one source you trust next time.

[blavaro]

Hi there,

I can see only few options here.

1. Deliver work without audio (even if your client says he´s got licence, is that true?)
2. Deliver work with audio with extra cost for licence(s)
3. Cancel

[uk1000]

Hi there,

I can see only few options here.

1. Deliver work without audio (even if your client says he´s got licence, is that true?)
2. Deliver work with audio with extra cost for licence(s)
3. Cancel

I believe he does have the license though based on what he’s shown on the order page, which CS can check. Though maybe it’s safer to reword the gig description/FAQ for future to be safe/not having to be worry if the buyer has the right license.

[misscrystal]

I believe he does have the license though based on what he’s shown on the order page, which CS can check. Though maybe it’s safer to reword the gig description/FAQ for future to be safe/not having to be worry if the buyer has the right license.

So you showed the order to CS to have them check the validity of the license? Or you must mean in case there is a question about it.

It’s off topic but you’ve taken an impressive number of fiverr tests. Quite remarkable.

[uk1000]

So you showed the order to CS to have them check the validity of the license? Or you must mean in case there is a question about it.

It’s off topic but you’ve taken an impressive number of fiverr tests. Quite remarkable.

Not yet (I meant if they wanted to check). Yesterday I started on a support ticket - I wasn’t sure if they should cancel or what was best to do, but I didn’t create the ticket in the end.

[blavaro]

The point is that you would deliver video incl. audio for which YOU do not have licence to do so. I would not sleep well in such case.