I don't think it makes a difference. If the audio is under copyright, it 
is illegal to post it. I believe you are also required to state the 
copyright owners.

This is a related article from this week:

Viacom wants its clips removed from YouTube

Associated Press
Published February 3, 2007

NEW YORK -- Media company Viacom Inc., which owns the cable networks 
MTV, VH1, Nickelodeon and the Paramount Pictures movie studio, asked 
YouTube on Friday to remove more than 100,000 unauthorized clips from 
its hugely popular video-sharing site.

Viacom said in a statement that after several months of talks with 
YouTube and its corporate parent, the online search leader Google Inc., 
"it has become clear that YouTube is unwilling to come to a fair market 
agreement that would make Viacom content available to YouTube users."

Viacom said that YouTube and Google had failed to deliver on several 
"filtering tools" to control unauthorized video from appearing on the 
immensely popular site.

The company was now asking YouTube to take the clips down, but stopped 
short of filing a lawsuit.

Under federal copyright law, online services such as YouTube are 
generally immune from liability as long as it responds to takedown 
requests such as these, which YouTube often does. Less clear legally is 
what happens when another user posts the same video, something commonly 
done on the free video-sharing site.

YouTube said in a statement that it would comply with the request from 
Viacom and said it cooperates "with all copyright holders to identify 
and promptly remove infringing content as soon as we are officially 

The company also said it was "unfortunate that Viacom will no longer be 
able to benefit from YouTube's passionate audience which has helped to 
promote many of Viacom's shows."

In November, YouTube agreed to delete nearly 30,000 files after the 
Japan Society for Rights of Authors, Composers and Publishers complained 
of copyright infringement.

Some media companies such as CBS Corp. and General Electric Co.'s NBC 
Universal have made deals to allow YouTube to use video clips from their 
programming, but others have yet to agree with the site over ways of 
being compensated for the use of their copyrighted material.

Universal Music Group, a division of French telecommunications giant 
Vivendi SA, had threatened to sue YouTube for copyright infringement, 
saying it was a hub for pirated music videos, but later reached a 
licensing deal with them last year.

Despite Viacom's problems with YouTube, the company's MTV Networks 
division reached a licensing deal last year with Google that allows the 
search company's video service to use clips from MTV and its sibling 
networks under a revenue-sharing agreement.

Bertram Lyons wrote:
> Does the fact that this is a home video alter the issues of copyright? If he were to do the same thing (i.e. digitize his 78 collection) and publish it online as an audio database with full sound files (instead of home video), would he be under any sort of copyright violation with the particular labels and songwriters associated with said recordings?
> Just curious -
> Bertram
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: [ARSCLIST] Some YouTube stuff that may be of interst
>> From: Roger and Allison Kulp <[log in to unmask]>
>> Date: Fri, February 02, 2007 10:06 pm
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> I will admit the guy has a lousy player,and some of his records aren't the best shape.
>> I have a better condition "Move It !" 78 myself,but it is interesting,
>>                                                   Roger
>> "If you're not on somebody's watchlist,you're not doing your job"
>>                           Dave Von Kleist
>> ---------------------------------
>> Don't get soaked.  Take a quick peak at the forecast 
>>  with theYahoo! Search weather shortcut.