Slashdot Mirror
Music Industry Issues Take Down Notices to 50 Major Lyrics Sites
alphadogg writes "A music industry group is warning some 50 website that post song lyrics that they need to be licensed or face the music, possibly in the form of a lawsuit. The National Music Publishers Association said Monday that it sent take-down notices to what it claims are 50 websites that post lyrics to songs and generate ad revenue but may not be licensed to do so. The allegedly infringing sites were identified based on a complicated algorithm developed by a researcher at the University of Georgia."
The "complicated algorithm" (basis statistics using Excel and Google) is described in the NMPA's "Undesirable Lyric Website List." Anyone remember lyrics.ch?
Pure and simple.
They own the copyright and that's that.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Are they trying to destroy their business? That's the only reason I can think of for making it harder for people interested in their product to get information about it.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
"Allegedly infringing sites were identified based on a complicated algorithm"
So... manually, then.
Someone needs to go after these DMCA abusers, and by that I mean this National Music Publishers Association who are getting a bot to send things out which is supposed to be "under threat of perjury" if it's a false statement.
It's supposed to be a double edged sword instead of merely a club to beat down on the consumers - cut them with it.
It took me a while to figure that out.
It's not like they're posting the sheet music or the guitar chords, let alone any kind of recording. If you don't already know the tune, the lyrics aren't going to help you understand the actual music. And since singers are so mush-mouthed these days, you need the lyrics to avoid accidentally creating new mondegreens.
Does iTunes even include the lyrics when you buy a song?
Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
I'm less sympathetic to commercial infringement, and I guess this is most likely infringing, but I can't help thinking this is pointless.
Lyrics sites can't generate a lot of direct revenue for the music industry through lyric licensing fees. They do generate indirect revenue by people googling for the song they heard a snippet of and then buying an album. Also many of the ads are going to be related to the song (listen to this song on last.fm, buy the ringtone) so it seems odd that they're putting the effort in to stop this.
The National Music Publishers Association said Monday that it sent take-down notices to what it claims are 50 websites that post lyrics to songs and generate ad revenue but may not be licensed to do so.
Excuse me, MAY? If you are issuing a take down notice to a website and you DON'T KNOW if it is even infringing, isn't that deliberate perjury under provisions of the DMCA? There needs to be stiff, rapidly escalating, monetary penalties for issuing phoney take down notices.
I remember lots of lyrics and if friends ask me, I tell them what they sing exactly in the song.
Should I be afraid they'll sue me next?
Ergo, not covered by copyright.
And moreover should they actually own the copyrights?
For a start, they don't, the MPAA are working on behalf of the copyright owners. So they, the MPAA don't own copyrights. They have not been asked to issue the takedown by the copyright owner.
Secondly, the label will own the copyright, but that work was done as a work for hire to reduce the rights of the actual artists, and works for hire aren't covered under copyright like that.
Thirdly, even where the other two hurdles happen to be passed, the copyright was for a limited time. That is no longer the case, so in the quid-pro-quo of copyrights, the owners of the copyrights should not hold the copyrights at all: the rights should be struck off.
Lastly, they aren't making money from the lyrics. They are making money off the ads on their site and they have costs of running the site which any business can deduct. If the copyright owners don't want the unauthorised making of money off adds on the site, then they should pony up money to pay for the sites and request that any revenues from the pages are forwarded to them.
I mostly use lyric sites to discover what a catchy song is called when I only know one or two lines.
I totally get how they can argue that file sharing sites etc cost them revenue, but this!?
These people are doing work and you think that this is wrong.
Why?
The revenue is not coming from selling the lyrics, they're coming from ads on the pages, so they are NOT making money off someone else's work.
Moreover, the entire frigging point of capitalism is making money off someone else's work: otherwise there would be NO PAID MANAGEMENT. NO SHAREHOLDERS. NO INTEREST RATES ON LOANS. EVERY one of those is making money off someone else's work.
Yet I bet you won't call any of those wrong and illegal and justly forbidden, will you?
These web sites get more from ads than the MPAA pays in royalities !! This cannot continue !! Why should some dweeb in Romania make money on artists' work when the artists make pennues a day (not counting those from heaven) !! This is action well worth taken !!
Whats next, kareoke ? oh wait, it is... crap. Well to be fair, I love lyrics website cause I know some singers just don't know how to talk correctly. it's like they have a hot potato in their mouth. I mean, listen to the granpa of heavy metal... Ozzy osbourne... Who the hell understands that guy when he talks. Sure, he's a great guy, I really love is music but... You need the enigma machine to decode when he speaks.
--dave
davecb@spamcop.net
MILEY CYRUS LYRICS
"Wrecking Ball"
We clawed, we chained our hearts in vain
We jumped never asking why
We kissed, I fell under your spell.
A love no one could deny
Don't you ever say I just walked away
I will always want you
I can't live a lie, running for my life
I will always want you
I came in like a wrecking ball
I never hit so hard in love
All I wanted was to break your walls
All you ever did was wreck me
Yeah, you, you wreck me
I put you high up in the sky
And now, you're not coming down
It slowly turned, you let me burn
And now, we're ashes on the ground
Don't you ever say I just walked away
I will always want you
I can't live a lie, running for my life
I will always want you
I came in like a wrecking ball
I never hit so hard in love
All I wanted was to break your walls
All you ever did was wreck me
I came in like a wrecking ball
Yeah, I just closed my eyes and swung
Left me crashing in a blazing fall
All you ever did was wreck me
Yeah, you, you wreck me
I never meant to start a war
I just wanted you to let me in
And instead of using force
I guess I should've let you win
I never meant to start a war
I just wanted you to let me in
I guess I should've let you win
Don't you ever say I just walked away
I will always want you
I came in like a wrecking ball
I never hit so hard in love
All I wanted was to break your walls
All you ever did was wreck me
I came in like a wrecking ball
Yeah, I just closed my eyes and swung
Left me crashing in a blazing fall
All you ever did was wreck me
Yeah, you, you wreck me
Yeah, you, you wreck me
Idiots, it's free advertising! My guess is they know the sites aren't going to shut down, they just want their licensing fees.
This really needs to be addressed, for the average person. We cant continue having single points of failure for services. There is too much at stake, both for the content consumers and the people trying to do their best to provide it.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Seems this has gotten out of hand. And the politicans who should be defending *our*, not *their* interests are looing the other way.
What other solution there is?
If I listen to a song on the radio, I can identify it by searching on the internet for a small part of the lyrics. How would me not being to identify a song I might decide to buy help the record companies?
today, not a single fuck was given.
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
...is to organize and sustain an effective boycott. Stop purchasing music from RIAA associated labels. Without revenue, they can't pay their lawyers.
I can't say I'm all that sorry to see evil (MAFIAA) go after the bad (shady lyric sites) since many of these sites are copying from each other, hiding lyrics behind JavaScript, have pop-ups, and in some cases carrying potentially infected ads. There are a few sites like SongMeanings.com that also include user comments, but most operations just seem to be trading other people's copyrights for ad impressions.
Interesting to see .nl and .br sites in the list.
Since they risk being shut down, the DBs need to end up torrented by an "unknown security breach at YourCompanyNameHere.com" and they'll never go away. It doesn't fix the problem with the destruction of ad revenue, but it undermines the NMPA's actions.
I've actually looked up a few lyric sites recently and they all had different variations. They look like most are phonetic so I'm guessing there's an industry somewhere using Chinese or Indian workers to transcribe the lyrics by listening to the songs rather than getting them from the publishers.
I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
It is such a sham they even call it the "music industry". The amount of assets in the form of recording studios and distribution is relatively quite small. What's big is the number of office buildings housing lawyers. If you ever drive around the West Hollywood or Beverley Hills area you'll see big office buildings full of lawyers. That's what the "industry" is...
Imagine there's no...damn. [[please deposit $.99 to continue]]
rewriting history since 2109
The lyrics sites in question have already consulted with their lawyers, and released the following statement which clarifies their positions on the issue:
Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me
Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me
Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me
Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me
Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me
Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me
Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me
Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me
Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me!
Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me!
Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me!
Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me!
Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me!
Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me!
Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me!
Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me!
Motherfucker!
(fuck you slashdot junk text filter)
That would be making money off their own work. And they don't have to: copyrights will bring in money without any further work from them and they're not in the business of doing work. Just getting paid.
Moreover, the entire bloody thing is run by accountants now. And to an accountant, EVERY sum is zero-sum. Double entry bookkeeping. Look it up. True fact.
So if someone else is making money, that's not "them making money", that's MONEY LOST TO YOU. ***EVEN THOUGH*** you are not going to do that work to get the money EVER.
Moreover, the ROI is very low and the work high, and that's just too much like hard work.
So, rather than do all that work and maybe make a tiny bit of money, they whine and bitch and insist that nobody can make money off "their work" (whilst completely ignoring the money they made off the work of their teacher teaching them their craft. Scrounging bastards").
Lyrics sites were one of the first things I remember when I first checked out the World Wide Web in Mosaic back in 1993.
Any sane judge is going to want to know why it has taken them 20 years to get around to filing a lawsuit.
Most music publishers stopped including lyrics with CDs ages ago, and almost never post them on say, the band's web site. The vast majority of lyrics on these sights are poor transcriptions posted by fans, which they lyric sites systematically swipe from each other. So if one site says the line is "there's a bathroom on the right", they pretty much all do.
Are less-than-perfect transcriptions of lyrics that have never been officially published a violation of copyright?
.
Prisencolinensinainciusol. Ol Rait!
I definitely remember lyrics.ch. I used it often to find the lyrics to that song I loved or to look up that song I heard on the radio but didn't know the name/singer of. In fact, with the latter case, a visit to Lyrics.ch would sometimes result in a sale for the recording industry. After all, if I loved that brand new song by that brand new band on the radio but didn't know either one by name, I'd be unable to purchase their works. After a visit to Lyrics.ch, I'd have been able to purchase their CD.
Nowadays, it would be even easier to generate sales. Just place a "Buy it on Amazon/Google Play/iTunes" button with a link to the song and these lyrics sites could drive profits to the record labels. They should view these sites as free advertising, not copyright violators. However, if they wanted some modicum of control, perhaps they should make a "lyrics site" license with some easy-to-follow requirements (e.g. no pop-up ads, no malware served, no links to "free downloads", links to Amazon/Google Play/iTunes, etc.) and a low cost of application. Then lyrics sites could "go legit" without too much fuss and the record labels would get the free publicity they generate.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
That's what this amounts to. And lost revenue. I've lost count of the number of times where I've been out in public and overheard pieces of a song I liked and committed key phrases to memory to google later. Never fails to find the song. (And frankly, sometimes the results are embarrassing. I like that shit?!)
When there's a real person out behind the website, like Lucky Wilbury, or Calin Coburn, then the right thing to do is patronise the legitimate source.
How many of the "protected" artists are offering their own sites for this stuff?
They feared that it could be used to suppress protest or support unpopular rule.
Let's see you take the subject line above down,
motherfuckers.
People want to see lyrics because they have probably
already got the music, and they like it.
You "music industry" idiots are biting the hand that feeds your sorry asses.
Me, I will never buy so much as one more song from you people,
because you have given me reason not to buy from you. Instead I
will buy from independent bands directly.
Happy birthday to you/happy birthday to you/happy birthday to auntie (pause)/happy birthday to you.
That should fix it.
Look, I am not an american, and i don't know all the music outside. But if I hear a tune I like, I google the lyric, et voila ! A new sale for EMI/whoever. If you remove the lyric web site... There is no way I can find out. Congratulation you killed sales.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
or eliminating your ability to search. They are ensuring they get ad revenue from your search destination.
The lyrics don't belong to the record companies, they belong to the song writer (who may or may not be the artist that is singing them.
It may be a regional thing. I hear it that way very often here in California. Occasionally even used correctly as the OP had it.
They feared that it could be used to suppress protest or support unpopular rule.
I run a FEC which plays music and since the service we use for obtaining the music in the first place (commercial service) doesn't give me the lyrics, I need to screen them for profanity. My choices are:
a) listen to each and every song, and as badly as some of these artists 'sing', I can't guarantee that I get it right and pick up any profane words
b) look up the song on a lyric site and skim it for profanity or keyword search it - takes about 3 minutes for a dozen songs vs an hour listening to all the tracks.
Music sites are just really jumping the shark - suing lyric sites? Over ad revenue?? For providing a service they refuse to provide themselves???
1. before lyrics sites, listeners simply didnt have access to much of the lyrical content of the music they were exposed to. industry cronies like the RIAA didnt give a shit if the poetic art of a song was conveyed legibly or eloquently; the tipper sticker is still at their discretion and used liberally to bump or kill a song or artists popularity. These lyrics sites stepped up and helped promote artists directly by engaging their listeners with informative and open information in most cases as to the content of a song, not just the sound of it. lyrics sites had forums dedicated to the meanings of songs as well as where to purchase them. As a parent, you appreciated these sites because it let you enforce or relax certain censorships against your child without having to resort to a vague and condescending sticker on the tin which of course, is not present on mp3s.
2. litigation cannot stop the internet much as cloistered catholic monks could not stop the spread of literacy. many lyrics sites will go dark to avoid litigation, but one can reasonably expect the site owners have an absolute plethora of other names and domains they can fall back on. Remember, the music industry trade association in question isnt proposing a solution to the problem of the lack of song lyrics in popular culture, theyre just enforcing trade and copyright at the behest of their stakeholders. lyric databases can be created and dissemenated across tor or through magnet links in bittorrent if need be.
3. a smaller point but the university of georgia's music industry shill happens to be david lowery: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Lowery
David is a musician famous mostly for the song 'low.' as far as most are concerned hes a relatively one hit wonder. so Yet another internationally renowned, nationally proven and locally beloved music figure has joined the staff this semester, and heâ(TM)s no slouch next to the other big names already there. 2 years later he just so happens to work on a project to help litigate lyric sites? it feels like the university of georgia might be a 'stacked deck' in this case used to justify litigation under the guise of academic research. Seeing as hes not published and his algorythm as well as its findings lack peer review outside a multi million dollar industry litigation agency, if he really is the researcher then we've got problems. if hwoever hes just a semester instructor, http://www.terry.uga.edu/news/releases/david-lowery-to-teach-spring-semester-course-for-ugas-music-business-certif
then id like to know the engineer or scientist and see more of their work.
IMHO, lowery has an axe to grind and is being used nicely by the industry to grind it (Metallica anyone?) hes not a top 10 for any label, so if this one fails theres no chance we lose a major investment...after all this is a guy on his blog who equates playing low-budget venues with serving in iraq
http://www.davidlowerymusic.com/300-songs-blog/blog/48-friends-3-guys-walk-into-a-bar-in-canoga-park-why-being-backstage-at-a-low-grade-music-festival-is-like-being-in-iraq
hes also posted tabs and lyrics to the songs from his band, Cracker. now correct me if im wrong, but your label owns that song. they own the tabs, they own the melody, they own your stage presence and likeness. http://www.davidlowerymusic.com/300-songs-blog/blog/45-movie-star-and-get-off-this-cracker-more-on-selling-out-the-marc-jacobs-edition-m1-tank
if Sony or the RIAA took any of this se
Good people go to bed earlier.
Britney Spears was a 21st century human singer. Her song "Toxic", a "traditional ballad," was played on Lady Cassandra's "iPod". The "iPod" is really a Jukebox and no one knows the lyrics to the song. The Music "Industry" destroyed said lyrics in a veiled attempt to prevent paying customers from knowing what the artist was singing. The effect was actually destruction of their own markets... Fools I tell you. They know not what they do. Here are some alternatives: Jamendo, Free Music Archive, Magnatune
- Good things come to he who waits... but, but Arch Linux FTW!
I'm pretty sure Doug Ingle never even knew the actual lyrics.
They feared that it could be used to suppress protest or support unpopular rule.
Unlike many of the posters above who are saying that this will kill music sales because when they don't know the artist or song title, they search for lyrics, I actually read the article - they're targeting only unlicensed lyrics sites. The fully licensed azlyrics.com will still exist, as will lyricfind.com and musicmatch.com. In fact, it appears that the ones that are targeted are the ones that have tons of pop-ups, malware advertisements, redirecting scripts, etc. So, good.
I hate lyrics sites, as they're often not accurate, and the sites themselves are rather skeevy. I really don't understand why bands (or their labels) don't post lyrics to their own sites?
Or even better, put the lyrics in the MP3 files themselves, when they're sold! iTunes has a spot for lyrics, and it's ridiculous that I have to fill in that box myself, even when I purchase a song from the iTunes store (or anywhere else, for that matter).
IANAL, but I am familiar with the business. For those of you claiming this is self-destructive, the NMPA as well as individual publishers actually license the lyrics right to certain lyrics websites. The publishers own a valid copyright in the lyrics alone, so legally speaking, republication of the lyrics without copyright license is infringement. Several lyrics websites are officially licensed and sanctioned. I won't name names, but you can usually tell which are licensed and which aren't by the quality and accuracy of the lyrics on the site.
Usually the publishers steer clear of these sites due to lack of personal jurisdiction, or at best make half-hearted efforts by throwing around a take-down notice here or there. Publishers want to collect money, and they're well aware that going after Lars Lokke Ummerstal in Latvia isn't going to be profitable. However, take-down notices are relatively cheap and easy, and I believe the idea is to stick by principle and crack down on infringing websites in order to have a chilling effect on copyright infringement generally. This is not new, or particularly newsworthy.
It's also not really all that infuriating, from a copyleft perspective. Because publishers are licensing their copyrights to lyrics and tablature, they aren't strangling the marketplace of ideas. The only real question is whether or not the sites are unfairly targeting websites legitimately engaging in fair use (as opposed to those actually making money off of advertising revenue and merely claiming their use is fair), but, as fair use is an affirmative defense and not a bright line rule, there's no way for a site to prove as a threshold matter that their use is fair.
"Gather 'round people
Wherever you roam
And admit that the waters
Around you have grown"
Buy the rest of the lyrics to this song by clicking HERE
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
Do you have the right to publish that list?
If not, take it down NOW!
Where is the legal site that contains lyrics, as not all albums and certainly not mp3s, come with them. This is another case of someone providing a service when there is no legal alternative. Or worse, if there is, its completed fragmented among a bunch of different sites.
...
I know its all fashionable to beat on the man, but seriously.
There might be some companies where CEO's do nothing, and there is certainly a debate worth having on whether many CEO's are paid too much.
But, the CEO is the person who decides what products the company makes, is responsible for making sure those products are built on time, and sell when they hit the market. They are the people who ultimately insure the company makes its payroll so workers have jobs and get paid. If its a publicly traded company you can add on the massive burdens of answering to regulators, shareholders and the media.
Most CEO's I've seen work really hard, I doubt I'd want the job. They usually have to travel a lot, they have to sit an insufferable amount of meetings, they carry huge burdens on their shoulders most of the time.
You seriously need to spend a week BEING a CEO, so we can all see how horrible you would be at it, and then maybe you would stop running your mouth spewing nonsense.
@de_machina
your life is nowhere and going down fast and you're whining and shitting over everything to make yourself look like you're no worse a total failure than everyone else.
PS did I upset you?
You seem VERY angry.
Must have hit a nerve.
Why is everyone so upset? The NMPA is already doing exactly what every Slashdotter would want, which is license multiple websites to provide lyrics for free to everyone who searches for them. They're just ensuring that unlicensed sites either get licensed or disappear so that those that are licensed can fully exploit those licenses.
Unfortunately for the NMPA, by accessing the sites, they agreed to the terms and conditions of the site, so the NMPA is obligated.
Next thing you know, the music industry will start suing their customers or something.... Where is napster when you need them?
It is now a fact ASSPIES lack empathy and shitdot is full of asspies. You are seeing your own seething hatred towards an honest day's work for an honest day's pay. Rather you take, take, take and give nothing in return. You and your ilk are the lowest of the low and are much like any parasite. Me, I laugh at stupid little fucktarded sheeple like you and capitalism eliminates shitstains like you. Face it, you have accomplished nothing for society and have only accomplished one thing for yourself, leach from others. Oh, your mommy called and she said you need to change your shit-filled underwear, take a bath daily, and know how to use a toilet without making a huge mess for her to fucking clean up, otherwise you will lose your internet privileges. Oh, and if you don't do any of that by next week you will be kicked to the fucking curb and left to fucking die like the worthless piece of shit you are.
GO AHEAD FUCKING FLAME AWAY
OR WASTE YOUR GODDAMNED
MOD POINTS FUCKTARDED SHITDOT SHEEPLE OR BETTER
YET GO SLIT YOUR FUCKING WRISTS
FUCKTARDED SHITDOT SHEEPLE
I'm not beating up the man, I'm pointing out how your retarded whine "they're making money off other people's work!" is actually THE ENTIRE BASIS OF CAPITALISM
Do you know what, canonically, the system that tries to ensure nobody makes money off other people's work is?
Communism.
I'm beating up not the man, but your ridiculous statement.
PS and why is "beating up da man" bad? Are they a class of people who cannot be blamed?
...and nothing of value was lost :)
Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
You seriously need to spend a week BEING a CEO, so we can all see how horrible you would be at it, and then maybe you would stop running your mouth spewing nonsense.
Deal. Now Freaky Friday this shit so that I can get on with destroying a company that's existed for over a generation. Man, I'm gonna short term flip that Fortune 500 so hard they're feeling it for five CEOs after, which, I know is only like, two years time, but still.
Hurry up, I want to finish in time for the coke and hooker parties.
Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
Everyone I know steals music and the record industry hasn't lost a dime because everyone I know is poor. If they couldn't steal the music they wouldn't go out and buy thousands of CDs they'd just listen to the radio or buy one great CD and listen to it over and over for years.
I understand all they care about is the money (completely understandable for corporations), but they aren't actually losing any, so...what the f**k?
We see with Obamacare what monoliths create when they try software engineering. Who here thinks the record industry could create ANY decent lyric sites themselves? And who is stupid enough to think such sites could EVER earn enough to offset their costs?
So, the free market does what it always does, and innovates new services- including these 'unauthorised' lyric sites. They 'cost' the music business LESS than nothing, since as I said, if such resources were provided by the music biz itself, they would generate a net loss. But what do they GIVE to the music biz?
-A MASSIVE increase in the interest mechanisms available to users (find and explore music by lyric)
-A MASSIVE resource for those that make music, or who are considering the same
-A MASSIVE addition to the profile of popular music
But you need a few functioning brain-cells to see the advantage of people working for FREE to promote/expand your business. Meanwhile, the filthy parasites we call LAWYERS make zero money from telling companies that free promotion is a GOOD thing. On the other hand, these parasites make EXCELLENT money using legal powers to destroy targets- regardless of WHY these targets are being destroyed.
So, the filthy parasite lawyers, and the 'researchers' they employ at universities, whisper their 'great plans' in the ears of the coke-fuelled owners of record labels, and operation "cut off your nose to pay for a lawyer's third home" begins.
Or they'd have other stuff up there and make money from that.
So you're fucking wrong.
But, the CEO is the person who decides what products the company makes, is responsible for making sure those products are built on time, and sell when they hit the market.
That describes no CEO I've ever met. They manipulate board meetings, decide how far they can go outside of the law without getting caught, make insider deals that serve their own interests at the expense of the workers, manipulate financial data to increase their bonuses, make big business deals of buying and selling subsidiaries in order to make the greatest profit for their buddies, and generally leave the running of the actual company to underlings.
The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
But, the CEO is the person who decides what products the company makes
engineers, designers, upper management
is responsible for making sure those products are built on time
middle management
and sell when they hit the market.
sales
They are the people who ultimately insure the company makes its payroll so workers have jobs and get paid.
accounting, payroll, human resources
If its a publicly traded company you can add on the massive burdens of answering to regulators
legal
shareholders
board of directors
and the media.
public relations, advertising
So... the CEO does nothing.
Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
The lyrics sites in question have already consulted with their lawyers, and released the following statement which clarifies their positions on the issue:
Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me! Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me! Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me! Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me! Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me! Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me! Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me! Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me! Motherfucker!
(fuck you slashdot junk text filter)
Oh man, dude, that's utter genius! Now what song are those the lyrics to, again?
The benefit of doing that is you will have gotten that oh-so-sweet CEO experience and will have no shortage of companies willing to pay you millions to come wreck their company!
CEOs sack people mostly, before taking the golden parachute and leaving, typically to rinse and repeat.
Yep, "There's a bathroom on the right". Its a song by the creedence Clearwater revibal (or something like that). Its like that other singer, Olivia Neutron Bomb, or this song , which made some people really mad, because after hearing it, they couldn't help but laugh, and then every time they heard the song again, couldn't think about the (official) lyrics, but only the new lyrics *DAMMIT, FUNNY STINKING LYRICS!* And now even a site that posts something orthogonal to the music like the lyrics is getting the bitchslap by the dying music industry. IMHO, if this is their biggest worry, then they really need to die.
What really got me was the word "may". So they simply start sending out threats left and right without even bothering to even check if there's any base to the accusations? If a site they threaten is actually licensed, will the organization issue an equally public apology? I don't think so.
And that, dear folks, is the "entertainment industry" for you!
/ The Arrow
"How lovely you are. So lovely in my straightjacket..." - Nny
Oh yeah. I was system administrator of its ISP at that time.
"The more prohibitions there are, The poorer the people will be" -- Lao Tse
OK are these guys insane? Why don't they just have all the musicians arrested so they can't write music that people will download. And how about going to kindergarten and getting all those lawbreaking students humming songs they heard on the radio? Oh oh oh, wait they need to get those radio stations that are playing those songs too. And Walmart, Target, K-Mart, etc need some take down notices for selling that music. I'm sure if they all come together and try really hard they will be able to single handed destroy the music industry for many, many years to come. Hell it could take centuries before anyone would even consider writing a song.
I'm old, not dead. Well that's my 2 cents worth, your mileage may vary. I say what I think, not what you want to hear.