Slashdot Mirror


Lyric Sites In Trouble With The MPA

Joe the Lesser writes "Apparently the Music Publishers Association is cracking down on sites, like LyricFind, that display song lyrics without permission. 'Just because there is no central licensing body it doesn't make it right to take lyrics and publish them without permission.' says Sarah Faulder of the MPA."

14 of 566 comments (clear)

  1. If they are making money out of it... by redcliffe · · Score: 4, Insightful

    then yes there should be royalties paid to the copyright owners. Non-profit users shouldn't have to though.

    1. Re:If they are making money out of it... by Alan+Cox · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If they don't include the lyrics maybe the hearing impared should simply sue them back. There are lots of people who can enjoy music but whose hearing isnt good enough to pull the lyrics out of the music.

  2. Lyrics by Gryftir · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This seems asinine to me. Don't free lyrics serve to enhance the listening experience? It seems to me that they are most likely to increase music sales.

    I mean isn't this fair use? I'll admit I'm still a bit hazy on the concept as it relates to this sort of non-commercial use, so would some kindly slashdotter explain how it would apply in this situation? Or are they talking about commercial lyrics sites? (I suppose such exist). I know I personally use a russian server for most of my lyric searches, and I'm aware Russian intelectual property law is or was rather spotty.

    --
    http://www.santacruzbynight.com/index.shtml Santa Cruz By Night Vampire Larp
  3. Question: by digitalunity · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If there is no central licensing body, who gave authority to the MPA to sue LyricFind on behalf of the copyright holders?

    ??

    ???

    --
    You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
  4. Ah, the iron fist. by yroJJory · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You'd think by now these people would understand that if you can search a snippet of lyric and the complete lyrics show up, then you'll know who the artist is and can go out and buy the album that may have been unknown to you before.

    Um, excuse me? Don't you want to sell more albums and get more royalties?

    I guess not.

    --
    Jory
  5. Re:This is a surprise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Poetry is a text based artform. Musical lyrics (most of which can't even be called poetry) are not exactly rocket science - it's the music people pay for not the inane lyrics except in extremely rare cases.

    I would like to see the business case for how lyrics damage record sales.

    If lyrics are protected and cannot be published or read, where does fair use end? Can music reviewers still write reviews with lyric snippets?

    Is posting the technical specifications of a product illegal once it has hit the market and ANYONE can get them for free, just like lyrics?

    The only argument I see is that having the lyrics on a site generates traffic that can potentially generate profit for a site - so you are profitting from the artists work. But by that same logic, just having the name of the song listed on your site generates the same traffic. Are those now illegal to publish as well? Is it also illegal to place the singer's or group's name on the site, because that may also generate traffic? Are unofficial fan and gossip sites illegal because they generate profit for the creator?

    The answer is yes. Remember all those lawsuits folks scoffed about when, for example, the Crayola corporation shut down multiple websites about their crayons, and *Ty (beanie babies) did the same? They even went so far as to serve legal papers to quake clans for using their names - and they could because they had the money to back up their legal departments insane claims.

    Welcome to 1984.

  6. unfathomable by The+Tyro · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I can't count the number of times I've gone to a lyrics site to find a song name/title/artist based soley on a line of lyrics.

    C'mon... everyone's had an old song running through their head from time to time, where they can remember only a line or two. Enter that line into any lyric site (or google with quotation marks around it), find the song, and mark it down on your "future purchases" list.

    What the hell is the matter with these people? I suppose if they want to cut their own throats they're free to do so, but sheesh...

    This has to be a hoax; no organization dedicated to making money can survive long with this level of stupidity.

    --
    Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
  7. Re:Uh...no by MartinG · · Score: 5, Insightful

    then it is still theft.

    It is not theft whether it is paid for or not. It is copyright infringement. This idea that copyright infringement is theft was invented by copyright holders and those who profit from strong copyright protection. If you look at copyright law you will see that it is legally quite different from theft. (and rightly so IMO)

    --
    -- MartinG To mail me: echo kewyjlcxyzvjfxbqwh | tr bcefhjklqvwxyz .@adgimnoprstu
  8. How far does this go? by mr+breakfast · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Supposing I quote two lines of a lyric, is that allowed? What if I quote a verse? Where does something become a breach of copyright? Can I have a whole song with a couple of incorrect words or could it be a three word phrase that is recognisably from a given song?

    This seems to be another excessive move from the recording industry. It seems to me that every time they take a step like this, the big record companies make themselves more obselete. Ultimately, artists won't want to be associated with their vile behaviour- there have been issues over artistic control of recordings for years and the more that viable alternatives arise, the more the creators of music will want to escape the machine.

    Hopefully soon we will start to see the big kids of the music industry adding financial bancruptcy to their moral and creative bancruptcies.

  9. Re:Uh...no by 91degrees · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If the sites are taken down, then the copyright holders still aren't getting any money. Where are they losing out here?

    Nobody will pay for the lyrics, apart from serious musicians who want to do a cover. If they don't want to pay, they'll just listen to the song, and copy the lyrics out.

  10. boy, is this short sighted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I heard an old Billy Joel ballad on the radio, a song from back in the days when I had hair. I just had a few lines, but the melody stuck with me.

    I typed those lines into Google with his name, and the song popped up on a fan/lyric site. It was "And So It Goes." Never would have found it otherwise.

    I did go out and buy the CD, though it wasn't easy to find. If this is their attitude, next time I'll just snag it off eDonkey. Fuck 'em. Lot's less hassle to just steal it.

    1. Re:boy, is this short sighted by ZorinLynx · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Thank you. I was waiting for someone to say this. I've found countless songs by looking for lyric snippets. I don't see how people posting lyrics online hurts the MPAA in anyway.

      They're just a bunch of troublecausing greedy bastards. I don't think I'm ever going to buy a CD again.

  11. Re:Uh...no by DickBreath · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Either way you look at it, copyright holders are not getting the $$$ that they are legally entitled to.

    Something seems very wrong here.

    Once you sing a song in public, the lyrics are now "out there".

    This is getting more stupid by the day.

    If you want to keep your lyrics a secret, then DON'T SING THEM and also DON'T PUBLISH THEM.

    If you wrote a song, however trivial, and sing it publicly, then is someone "stealing" from you if they write down your lyrics? Put them on a web site? Yet, nothing has actually been "removed" from you?

    I'm not arguing the legal aspect of the lyrics copyright status. I'm just saying that this is getting pretty downright ridiculous. Which will lead to a massive disrespect for copyright altogether. Which BTW seems to be happening as we speak.

    Doesn't the MPA (not mpaa, and not riaa) have better things to do like busting down the door of kids birthday parties to arrest people for singing "Happy Birthday".

    I will go so far as to say that I think one form of copyright simply should NOT exist. That is "performance rights". The very idea that nobody else can sing your song? Then keep it to yourself. (I can hear the second grade teacher saying.)


    We need to form a SIG publisheres association so I can sue people who steal my sig. Would that be the SPA? Oh, wait.

    --

    I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
  12. Re:Uh...no by Sj0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The thing you have to realize, is that the entire music industry is exceptionally evil. Not plain run of the mill "kicking small children with steel toe boots" evil, no, a much more special and exceptional evil -- pitting artists against their own fans, and screwing both on a massive scale. This includes lawsuits brought against college students, state sanctioned cyberterrorism on a massive scale, hypocritical moral indignation, paying artists next to nothing for music that earns the companies millions of dollars net, and actions like this, which take a practice which wouldn't be illegal anywhere else(scrawl down the lyrics to your favourite song, and hand out a bunch of copies. No court in the country would touch the case with a 500ft pole) and call it something different because "it's digital", bribing(through the more ambiguous "softmoney contribution), and other evil things (though I'm sure they do get out their small child kicking boots once in a while for concerts).

    In this case, evil on a massive scale is it's own justification.

    --
    It's been a long time.