Says in the article they have a license. “It also earns money by providing lyrics and facts about songs that it publishes and licenses under agreement with music publishers”
-
-
-
That's a very carefully phrased PR blurb that does not mean all lyrics on Genius are licensed. Anyone can add lyrics to Genius and Genius does not even always list the song-writers or rights owners, which makes it harder for them to know its there.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Reminds me of Feist v. Rural. Feist got caught copying from Rural's phonebook because of phony trap entries, but it really didn't matter because nothing Rural did was creative and deserving of copyright.
-
Reminds me of this (fictional) Bill Gates/Steve Jobs scenehttps://youtu.be/ic-CMlZdQ0E
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
WSJ article completely misses sketchy history around lyrics sources. The original "legal lyrics" site, Gracenote/CDDB's, scraped various community scanned/transcribed sites to build their database of lyrics, down to their errors. Gracenote sold it to Lyricfind, which Google uses.
-
I remember back in the day, Y! Music licensed their lyrics database, and were only allowed to show images of the lyrics instead of text... while Gracenote may have been licensed to publish the lyrics, they did not actually do most of the work to transcribe the lyrics!
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Just think, if the artists put the lyrics somewhere where we could all find them, particularly conveniently.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Songwriters get paid a royalty percentage from radio plays and streaming. While smaller than the artists themselves, they add up if they write a few long-lived hits.
- 1 more reply
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.