Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
Lyrics Sites Next Targets For Content Groups?
pcmag.com — "U.S. digital entertainment company Gracenote on Thursday said it obtained licenses to distribute lyrics as music publishers mulled legal action against Web sites that provide them without authorization."
hemphill81- 401 diggs
- digg it
- Prod_Deity, on 10/12/2007, -0/+23"We anticipate that you'll see different kinds of offers in the market, where lyrics are combined with recorded music in a total package like a subscription......"
Why am I not liking this idea?- Zarks, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15"We anticipate that you'll see different kinds of offers in the market, where lyrics are combined with recorded music"
What, like when you get the lyrics in the liner notes with a CD?
No one's thought of that one before.
- Zarks, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15"We anticipate that you'll see different kinds of offers in the market, where lyrics are combined with recorded music"
- Computer_Kid, on 10/12/2007, -0/+29How is distributing lyrics illigal? Soon, you wont be able to sing along.
- bertwagner, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16Singing along out in public would probably be considered a public performance, which is illegal ;)
http://www.unhappybirthday.com/ goes into a little more detail about it in regards to the Happy Birthday song. - Zarks, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7Yep, the're gonna adapt the software that reads licence plates from cameras to read people's lips and issue automatic $100 fines to anyone singing copyrighted lyrics in public.
It's in revelations people! - ilyag, on 10/12/2007, -12/+4Distributing lyrics for free is illegal for the same reason that distributing books for free is illegal. Just because it's a short-form style of writing does not make it different in any way. Now, when they try to go after you for distributing lyrics that are in public domain, then you can rightfully complain.
If you're confused about all this "law" business, don't fret, you're not alone. It's not a very easy topic for most people to understand. I suggest this as a nice place to start researching it, if you're really curious why this is illegal:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain#United_States_law - ilyag, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12As an addition to what I was saying... music companies would be completely insane to invoke copyright laws for lyrics. Similarly, anyone who forms their entire business plan on selling things that are so widely available for free to begin with (Gracenote) is similarly insane.
The point is: the law is there, and it is sound. But these companies should not try to invoke it because it's counter-productive and will be such a massive PR failure that they'll likely lose far more money than they'd gain from it.
- bertwagner, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16Singing along out in public would probably be considered a public performance, which is illegal ;)
- david76, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Yeah. I think songwriters appreciate when you belt out lyrics like "Big old Jed had a light on!" (Steve Miller Band reference) They should be compensated for you to have the opportunity to learn the lyrics correctly.
- yizuman, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1or even whistle a toon!
- Marshy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13song lyrics help me find cool artists all the time. It's not ***** piracy. My grandma uses song lyrics.
- ninjagamer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6I wonder how much they will charge you for the legal versions?
- penwen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15More then its worth to sing the right words,
Id rather sing the wrong words all my life then give them the satisfaction of making money off that *****
- penwen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15More then its worth to sing the right words,
- stark23x, on 10/12/2007, -1/+24Unreal. Typing the lyrics to a song is considered an infraction by record companies now?
Dear Recording Industry:
***** like this is precisely and exactly why sales are dropping. You treat us like crap, we're not going to care about "stealing" music. Treat us like customers for whom you have an ounce of respect and maybe we'll buy your product.
Signed,
Sick of it all so go to hell, RIAA- S1mba, on 10/12/2007, -14/+2As I said, it is clear cut copyright violation. Plain and simple.
"Treat us like customers for whom you have an ounce of respect and maybe we'll buy your product."
LOL. Oh please. That's an outright lie and you know it. People like you won't pay for music as long as you can get it free. No matter how nice the record company treats you. So just stop trying to say otherwise. Everyone knows better. - Marshy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9S1mba, this isn't about stealing music. This is about reading the words the artist sings. Half the time cd's don't have lyrics so....?
- S1mba, on 10/12/2007, -4/+0"S1mba, this isn't about stealing music."
I was attacking the letter itself as disingenous. Because you and I both know full well that the vast majority of people who currently pirate music will not "buy the product" no matter how nice the RIAA becomes. Not when they can continue to get it for free.
"This is about reading the words the artist sings. Half the time cd's don't have lyrics so....?"
Again, that does NOT make it legal to violate copyright, especially when you are doing it for profit. As I said before, the vast majority of the large lyric sites out there are making a profit from advertising. And redistributing copyrighted work for a profit without a license to do so is very illegal.
If you want to get pissed off at someone, I would suggest you get pissed off at these large lyric sites. More then likely, the RIAA would have just looked the other way if these sites hadn't been redistributing the lyrics for profit. In otherwords, a few greedy lawbreakers ruined it for everryone by trying to turn distribution of copyrighted material into a money making venture. - Eccles, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Then the RIAA members should simply make the lyrics available themselves on their web site, and we'll see their advertising instead.
- S1mba, on 10/12/2007, -14/+2As I said, it is clear cut copyright violation. Plain and simple.
- ReverendRodger, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10This is actually more or less old news and has been going before the music industry began the witch hunt for music pirates. There used to be a few really good lyric sites in the early days of the net and I believe they were sued (and shut down if I remember correctly) by Fox Media.
On that note, I still find this ridiculous. Much more ridiculous than suing people that download a couple of mp3s on Kazaa. At least when the music industry says that someone that downloads mp3s is costing them money it's at least a semi-legitimate claim (though I personally use downloaded mp3s to pick out what CDs are worth buying). To go after someone for putting the words to a song on their website and giving the artist credit for his work is just stupid and greedy. No, I don't want to buy your lyrics also. I bought the right to know the lyrics when I bought the CD. - sahlsmith, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8So, if a song, like "It;s a Small Small World," gets stuck in my head and the lyrics keep repeating, do I have to pay Disney a royalty for each cycle?
Even though that may be the most annoying tune every written?
Is this a sinister terrorist plot to drive us insane and bankrupt us simultaneously?- S1mba, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Your brain does not fall under the category of "an unauthorized retreival system"... Unless you are an android. Then it is illeggal cause it is an unauthorized electronic retreival system
- vx69, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I wonder if http://downhillbattle.org/ will get involved?
- evirus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9buy two songs get one's lyrics for free
total stupidity - TheGoodGuy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6boooooo!
Everyday corporate America finds a new revenue stream in the process alienating their own end users. This is NOT good. Of all the companies, i would have not assumed gracenote to take this route.
Time for another boycott.. freedb anyone? - Wolfboy, on 10/12/2007, -8/+3Song lyrics are protected by copyright. Typing them and publishing them -- on paper, online, wherever -- violates the copyright. Those are the rules and they were in place long before the Web got started in the early 1990s.
A lot of those lyric sites have advertisements. Not only are they publishing the lyrics without permission or payment to the song writers, they are making money off the song lyrics.
If the lyric sites and the music industry can work out a deal to pay the songwriters and continue to provide the lyrics to the fans at a reasonable (preferrably free, supported by ads) cost, then it seems to me that everyone wins.- flinx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"If the lyric sites and the music industry can work out a deal to pay the songwriters and continue to provide the lyrics to the fans at a reasonable (preferrably free, supported by ads) cost, then it seems to me that everyone wins."
Remember streaming 'net radio? They worked out a sweet deal on that one. If history is any indication, they will demand far too much and nearly all innovation for lyrics sites will vanish as they choke down control to the highest bidder. The only time working out a deal works out for the consumer is when a big, sexy, white (and truly innovative) gorilla like Apple has them in a corner.
And make no mistake, the 'songwriters' is just industry code for the-corporations-who-own-the-so-called-property. Most songs of any import have long since been sold off or carved up into multiple corporate interests.
Sure, these lyrics sites violate copyright, but the heady tones of moral outrage aren't justified just because something is illegal. The legacy implications of old-style copyright have little or no meaning in the digital world. They need to be replaced by something more modern and ethical. It would benefit music listeners AND performers if this happened. The only people who would be hurt are the industrial age bottleneck companies who are no longer needed.
- flinx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"If the lyric sites and the music industry can work out a deal to pay the songwriters and continue to provide the lyrics to the fans at a reasonable (preferrably free, supported by ads) cost, then it seems to me that everyone wins."
- GuyOnOatmealBox, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Putting song lyrics on the internet is illegal....
wonder when the RIAA is gonna start suing people on msn with song lyric names?- ohgr, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6They would if they could... believe me they would
Woah thats illegal use of a rhyme. - Marshy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4song titles cannot be copyrighted.
- ohgr, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6They would if they could... believe me they would
- splammo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3I hope authors of books start suing people who use quotes from their books, even if they are properly cited. On the other had does Gracenote understand that maybe the music industry is attacking on too many fronts. They are not winning the battle against downloading music as far as I can tell and it probably won't do anything other than piss people off to start shutting down lyrics websites. In addition can artists be sued for putting their own lyrics on their website as many of them do. If they make them publicly available for free does anyone have any right to stop lyrics websites from effectively mirroring the artists websites and providing the lyrics?
- S1mba, on 10/12/2007, -7/+0"I hope authors of books start suing people who use quotes from their books, even if they are properly cited"
They can't. Fair use.
The reason quoting even brief parts of songs often does not fall under fair use is because there are limits on the percentage of a copyrighted work that you can quote and still have it considered fair use. And songs are usually very short. So copying even a small portion off the lyrics puts you over the limit.
However, even for song lyrics, there are special cases for educational use. - Marshy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6s1mba you are an idiot. an example is stephen king, who pays for all the song lyrics in his books.
- S1mba, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4"s1mba you are an idiot."
Argumentum ad hominem. But thanks for trying. - S1mba, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1"an example is stephen king, who pays for all the song lyrics in his books."
Exactly. Because what he is doing does NOT fall under fair use. So he has to pay to license the content.
Try actually reading my post next time before you run your mouth off and make yourself look like a fool. Ok? - md4wg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0S1mba, you must be a member of the RIAA's legal team . . or maybe just a know-it-all jerkoff.
Oh, wait . . .
- S1mba, on 10/12/2007, -7/+0"I hope authors of books start suing people who use quotes from their books, even if they are properly cited"
- combatchuck, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Just one more justification to not buy music from these scum.
- macweirdo42, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4What? Firstly, it's not like they're making money from song lyrics right now anyway, and if they did start charging, no one would pay. So what exactly are they trying to accomplish, or are they really so full of themselves as to not comprehend the inanity of it all?
- Wolfboy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Actually, they do make money off the lyrics.
I know an author who wanted to use some lyrics he found meaningful to serve as the introductory lines the chapters of his book. He didn't want the whole songs, just a few lines from the songs.
If he had not contacted the music publisher and gotten permission, he would have violated the copyright. "Fair use," the law decided long ago, does not extend to song lyrics (and I think poetry) the way it extends to taking a few sentences out of a prose text.
My memory is that he was prepared to pay, but based on the nature of his book, a memoir of his time in the war in Kosovo, the songwriters allowed him to use the lyrics for free. - bacon_skoda, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3since it's their property, they can do with it what they want. insane or not.
- Wolfboy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Actually, they do make money off the lyrics.
- lofiboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4This is such garbage.
I want to know how free lyrics is hurting them. Possibly the fact that people are getting something for nothing. Greedy *****. - marleno8, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Clearly a very absurd idea for this to be a violation. Read my lips and pay me money for what I say? It’s called greed. And as far as accuracy to lyrics, sites like http://lyricsfly.com/ have a built in correction system which works very well. I don’t need to pay for something I should get for free.
- ccec, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3In many cultures the history, family stories, and otherwise are passed down verbally and sometimes through song. This just goes against many of our social inclinations. Songs and lyrics become a part of our heritage, social circles, and lives. We have to speak them, promote them, sing them obnoxiously on the subway, and post some silly page with our favorite lyrics. It is how we work.
- qroon, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0And who's next? Tablature sites?
- SmeRndmGy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4The RIAA will release their own lyrics site as soon as they think of a way to put DRM on plain text on a webpage, and when they get someone like Apple to convince the masses that it is cool to pay for something free. Next you won't be allowed to listen to music in your cars unless you have the windows up, because someone who didn't pay for the music might hear it when you drive past. Cars will automatically roll the windows up whenever the stereo is turned on and disabling this mechanism or driving an older car that doesn't have it will be illegal under the DMCA.
- S1mba, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2"How is distributing lyrics illigal?"
Because it is copyright violation. And it is a pretty clear cut case of it. It's just that up to this point, the record companies have just not done anything about it. - S1mba, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2btw,
Especially when you consider that a lot of these lyric sites are using advertisting to make money. That makes it very illegal. Unauthorized distribution of copyrighted material, for the purpose of making a profit.- ccec, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2That's the only valid point.
- S1mba, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1"That's the only valid point."
Even if you aren't trying to make money, it's still illegal. It's just that often copyright holders will look the other way. But if you start using it to make money, it's like putting a giant read blinking sign on you that says "Here I am, come sue me." - mousky, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1S1mba: Care to cite the act, regulation or case law that says you are prohibited from making money by using portions of copyrighted work?
- TechGK, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It was funny this popped up on front page digg. As I saw this I was just copy and pasting lyrics into my lyrics info on iTunes. Don't you think the possibility that the iTunes Music Store may just add in the lyrics for the same 99 cent price per song? They will fail if they start memberships fees, very few will take the time to register for the time it takes to get them free off some lyrics website. That's what will drive the Emarkets is ease of use and time efficiency.
- SirZRX, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1If i put a lyric phrase on my MSN Messenger nickname that would be illegal?
- SmeRndmGy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1According to them, yes, and if you think that is ridiculous, you must be a criminal who needs to be sued for thousands of dollars. Unless you already paid them thousands of dollars for a license to distribute lyrics via away messages. Then you're fine.
- marleno8, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2"oh baby baby..."
There... I just violated copyrights of thousands of song lyrics and I can be sued for lots of money LOL - SethHoyt, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Although lyrics absolutely should be protected by copyright. the problem in cases like these is that there is no suitable alternative published in the Internet space. Websites put this content on the Internet because the copyright holders have not done so. If the rights-holders wanted to make this available in the Internet space. they had ample opportunity to do so. The fact that they have failed to do so coupled with the fact that others have made them available for free indicates that there is not much in the way of financial incentive for them to do this.
As such. if everyone respected the letter of the law. it would be very difficult. if not impossible to search song lyrics on the web. There are many occasions when I know some of the words of a song. but don't know its name or even artist. But I can simply enter some of the lyrics verbatim into a search engine and find the matching song along with the rest of the lyrics. If I wanted to buy the song. I wouldn't have been able to do so without doing such a search first. This would clearly not be possible if the lyrics had not been published online without permission, since those with the legal rights have failed to do so.
I believe there ought to be a clause allowing for the distribution of copyrighted material in a domain that the rights-holder has failed to utilize. This goes for time as well as space domains. For example. we hear all the time about old movies that need to be protected in case the studios want to re-release them in the future. Well. that almost never happens. and for all intents and purposed the movies just sit in the archives collecting dust. The law is not serving its purpose in cases like this. If the studio is not selling it after a certain time. I fail to see what they have to lose by allowing others to distribute it amongst themselves (without requiring payment) once publication has ceased.- SethHoyt, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0Hmm, somehow all my commas became periods. Must be because I cut and paste it from a different application. Excuse my punctuation ;-)
- Hoov, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2So what's next? Am I going to walk into a store and buy a CD that has only the beats to the song on it, and then be charged extra for the lyrics associated with them?
- InContrast, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0So now they have banned guitar tabs, downloading music, dancing in videos, and you know they will go after lyrics, it's already started. Soon you'll be walking down the street and you'll be arrested for unauthorized reproduction of the beat from "The walking song". Come on, this is just getting silly.
- ilovemusic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2This is just ludicrous. How can you even enjoy a song if you don't know the words to it? Next think you know, you'll get arrested for tapping your foot and humming along with a song. RIAA = Greed.
- wallclimber, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2My best friend is a musician. He is often hired to play fill-in for different bands or in studios. Many times these fill-in jobs are last minute, and the most he gets sent might be a play list of songs the bands do....at least for the cover tunes used.
It is a standard procedure, if there happens to be a song listed that he doesn't know, to do a search for lyrics and chords and whatever else is available so he can be better prepared for the show.
Access to lyrics is invaluable to most musicians. Restricting their availability is stupid. The venues where musicians play for audiences already pay a fee for the right to have live music performed. Not to mention the many other ways that music gets paid for.
It's sad to live in a world full of people who point to everything they see and cry, "Mine! Mine! And you can't have it, or use it, or listen to it, or learn it, or share it, or change it unless I let you, and you must pay and pay and pay and pay for every tiny little piece of it..." Like spoiled children.
Hmmmph...
- mousky, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The purpose of copyrights and patents was to encourage innovation, invention and interpretation. In exchange for one's investment of time and money, the government grants you a limited monopoly, giving you the opportunity to recoup your investment and possibly earn a living for a short period of time. Today, copyrights and patents are seen as forms of absolute control of what the end user can do and cannot do with a piece of music, etc. There are also seen as method of making money, lots of it.
- cutmaster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The best way to get rid of a law, is to in-force it.
Soon you will have enough people getting pissed off at the ignorance of these laws and demand then to be changed, or to rid them from the books all together.
Nothing is going to change, as a matter of fact they will only get worse. Until we force these changes.
If your old enough to vote, then that's the least you can do. - ChiKoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2What's next? Album art will have to be obtained through some service?
- mousky, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Don't give them any ideas ;)
- 3amfriday, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Regardless of the legal issues, I know this - When I hear a song on the radio I like, I google a line or two that I remember. Lyrics sites are primary way I discover new music.
- Blue_Eon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2wallclimber said it best, I think.
On a similar note, what does the RIAA say about cover bands, especially those making money off of other artist's music? What about a garage band made up of teens who just want to play a Nirvana song for the hell of it...in their garage?
I guess those types of things will be illegal next...and then what? - SmeRndmGy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Fans want to know what the words to songs are. A lot of CDs do not include the lyrics written down anymore. The RIAA offers no way to find out lyrics. Other groups have filled the demand for song lyrics on the internet. Now they RIAA wants to shut them down, and replace them with nothing. The demand will not go away. The only way to get rid of these "unauthorized" free lyrics sites is to make a better free lyrics site and get everyone to switch to it. It is called the free market, something this country is based on. Instead they want to eliminate competition and freedom information in the name of their own profits.
- bacon_skoda, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1free market is not free. you are free to buy and sell. gracenote will probably be selling the lyrics or subsidize it in some way. that's the legal way.
- antdude, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1http://www.duggmirror.com/tech_news/Lyrics_Sites_Next_Targets_For_Content_Groups/
- 500freestyle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2At first I thought the music industry was so hell-bent on protecting the way things were they were inadvertently driving their customers away. Now they seem to be making a conscious effort.
- negativeview, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I often turn on the radio, or Internet radio, or some other form of media and get the middle of a song. A song that I like. I often make a conscious effort to remember a line or two of the song so that I can google for it and *gasp* buy it.
Oh well. Guess I'll buy even fewer CDs now. Radio and MTV (back when they played music) were great for the industry because people could hear new music without having to pay anything. There was no real risk. Now they've killed my primary way to go from the no-risk avenue to paying for an artist that I've deemed worthy of my money. - mousky, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Copyright holders seem to think that copyright gives them total control over their content, and unfortunately, the politicians seems to agree. Every piece of legislation over the past 20 years has been in favor of copyright holders. The DMCA was the epitome of this swing.
- Apocalyptk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I think we should sing Denis Leary's song "*****" outside their office buildings and refuse to pay royalties.
- peterredding, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0You can find loads of lyrics in alt.music.lyrics so let's wait for them to butt heads with Google over the fact that you can probably find most of the song lyrics you want on Usenet through Google Groups.
Fight! Fight! Fight! Fight! Fight! Fight! Fight! Fight! - Sabey, on 02/21/2008, -0/+0Capitalism today isn't that far away from communism with big companies like this unitaterally deciding to take over a whole market. Keep the free market alive people! Lets keep free sites like http://www.moozic.net alive to find song lyrics with. Song lyrics for the people!
- Sabey, on 02/21/2008, -0/+0Capitalism today isn't that far away from communism with big companies like this unilaterally deciding to take over a whole market. Keep the free market alive people! Lets keep free sites like http://www.moozic.net alive to find song lyrics with. Song lyrics for the people!
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by