Copyright strikes don’t need to actually be relevant, or real. That’s kind of the problem with the system. They’re used for intimidation and screwing over others, not to actually protect copyright.

Well supposedly the AI company is the one who has made the copyright strike against the artist - so the copy or style thing doesnt entirely matter - they’ve stopped her income and are trying to take it for themselves. (I’m also a tad suspicious of the story btw)

According to sources, the scheme worked like this: someone fed YouTube videos of Campbell performing to an AI engine, which then replicated her voice and instrumental style. That fabricated music was then distributed across platforms using a company called Vydia.

Vydia then proceeded to file copyright claims against the original source videos on Campbell’s own YouTube channel, the same videos that had been used to teach the AI to sound like her in the first place.

Because YouTube’s copyright claim system operates without individual human review of each dispute, Campbell’s channel was effectively handed over to Vydia’s financial control. “I am no longer making money on YouTube,” she said. “Vydia is making money on YouTube off of my own videos of me playing my own banjo in my own backyard with traditional folk songs, some for my own family, over AI-generated music.”

What was made up ?

Someone uploaded a Datsun B210 commercial to YT, and was contacted by a person demanding $15000 for the video as they had “claimed” copyright on material “that Nissan had released into the public domain”.

• you can’t claim copyright on public domain material.
• Nissan never released the copyright.

Nevertheless, YT blocked the video for “copyright violation”.