> However, I intended to release all of my videos under a free license, so that they could be used in the future for others to educate and inform students about these beautiful works. Even in cases where my defense to the ContentID claims were successful, the videos were not reverted to this free license, making it much more difficult for others to use and share these digitized works in the way I originally had intended.
If you don't own the copyright of the thing or have a license to it, how can you "release it under a license" any license at all?
Is the OP just not saying it clearly, and what they really wanted to do was to mark it as in the public domain?
Or does Youtube actually have no way to do this?
Our entire cultural practices, corporate policies, and software feature lists, are set up ignoring public domain use cases. People don't even realize how this stuff works legally, which doesn't help. But you can't release something under a license if you don't own it (or have a license to re/sub-license it).
If you don't own the copyright of the thing or have a license to it, how can you "release it under a license" any license at all?
Is the OP just not saying it clearly, and what they really wanted to do was to mark it as in the public domain?
Or does Youtube actually have no way to do this?
Our entire cultural practices, corporate policies, and software feature lists, are set up ignoring public domain use cases. People don't even realize how this stuff works legally, which doesn't help. But you can't release something under a license if you don't own it (or have a license to re/sub-license it).