Publishers Still Trying To Squeeze Money Out Of Lyrics Sites

from the money-money-money dept

Mon, May 10th 2010 3:13pm — Mike Masnick

We've covered this silly move in the past by music publishers and songwriters, but they're apparently still at it, and the NY Times is giving them publicity for trying to shut down lyrics sites online. This is ridiculous for any number of reasons, but shows you the state of some parts of the music industry these days. Basically, lyrics -- which, by themselves, generated absolutely no money for songwriters/publishers for pretty much the entire history of the business -- are suddenly seen by publishers as gold, because some people started putting them online. And rather than realize that this is a way to get more attention to songs, more attention to songwriters and more attention to lyrics -- all the publishers and songwriters saw was "hey, people should give us money for repeating the lyrics we wrote!" And since then it's been a constant battle. Oddly, the NY Times article never seems to even present the other side of the argument -- that perhaps it's ridiculous to try to charge people for putting lyrics online. Instead, it seems to think that the idea makes perfect sense. But, then again, this is the newspaper that thinks putting up a big paywall makes perfect sense too...

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: copyright, lyrics, music

200 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

NAMELESS.ONE, 10 May 2010 @ 3:34pm

indeed
as the heroes sit by the river and they eat raw liver- black sabbath

WORST lyrics of all time voted
yet its one of sabbaths most cool tunes to listen too.
Message
lyrics are nothing wihtout the music and you cant write utter nonsense and it still gets played and listened too
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
jupiterkansas (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 3:54pm

Reason #18 not to buy legit music
Still can't figure out why lyrics aren't embedded in the mp3s I buy online. It's a SELLING POINT! not a profit source.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Technopolitical (profile), 12 May 2010 @ 6:56pm
  
  Re: Reason #18 not to buy legit music
  "Still can't figure out why lyrics aren't embedded in the mp3s I buy online. It's a SELLING POINT! not a profit source."
  
  Remember in the old days in the lyric sleeve of the vinyl album , under each song lyric; "Lyrics by permission of ... the Lyricist".
  
  The Artist and/or the record company paid the lyric writer for the both for the right to record the song AND to the right print the lyrics with the album.
  
  As well , the record company could choose to save $$ , and not print the lyrics at all --to avoid paying any roylties to the lyricist -- even if it is that recording artist's lyrics that is on that album.
  
  The Music Industry is not made up of all nice people.
  
  Look at for example Kris Kristofferson , who wrote "Me and Bobby McGee."
  
  How many Kris albums do you own? None I bet.
  
  But somewhere in you music library you you got at least one cover of "Bobby McGee". Maybe more.
  
  When Kris cut his own cover , of Bobby McGee,, which was much lower in selling than Janis Joplin's cover , good chance his record company would skimp , and not print the lyrics thus giving royalties to Kris.
  
  Because from the Record Company prospective it like giving Kris and now his fans -- the album's buyers --- Free $$$.
  
  If Kris's fans want the lyrics the record companies say "let them ( the fans) pay for it at the music store".
  
  There is always some trying to shortchange the songwriter.
  
  Today it is for-profit-lyric-websites.
  
  ( I am using Kris just as an example here of the many Songwriting Artist that would fit into this catagory.
  I do not claim any knowledge of the factual occurance that was between Kris and his record company at the time of Bobby Megee's finacial peak. It is just an academic example )
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - PaulT (profile), 13 May 2010 @ 9:29am
    
    Re: Re: Reason #18 not to buy legit music
    Kristofferson was already paid for his lyrics. He could have signed a contract that gave him more, but he didn't Tough, blame the corporate assholes who are trying to screw the lyric sites now, not the sites themselves. If he doesn't get a cut from Joplin's cover, it's the contract he signed, not the lyrics site that's screwing him.
    
    "How many Kris albums do you own? None I bet."
    
    Can't say I've ever bothered. I'm not from the US so country is not something I've ever been exposed to and most of it grates on me. I like him as an actor, but who knows about his music? Maybe if I heard a song in a movie then Googled some lyrics, I'd realise it was him and check it out? I'm not bothered otherwise.
    
    But, I have bought movies where he has been paid as an actor. Again, not my fault if he settled for a per-play gig rather than royalties, even if I happen to discover a movie by browsing "illegal" YouTube clips of his work.
    
    "But somewhere in you music library you you got at least one cover of "Bobby McGee". Maybe more."
    
    I can honestly say that I don't, and I have close to a thousand records. Which is perhaps why I don't know the song, and would have to depend on Google to find out what it was if I heard it.
    
    "( I am using Kris just as an example here of the many Songwriting Artist that would fit into this catagory.
    I do not claim any knowledge of the factual occurance that was between Kris and his record company at the time of Bobby Megee's finacial peak. It is just an academic example"
    
    Me neither, but thanks for providing an example in any case. But, I have to notice that all of the examples you have provided are for music made in the 60s and 70s - nothing newer? It's no wonder you're disconnected from the way people actually use these sites if you don't even listen to music recorded in this millennium. Just saying.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Technopolitical (profile), 13 May 2010 @ 11:05am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Reason #18 not to buy legit music
      stated before you asked :
      
      Please point me to the site where I can do this. I don't think I've ever seen a site that *sells* lyrics alone"
      
      I replied :
      Those who sell the lyrics directly , they are called "music publishers" The ones that print the songbooks we USED to BUY , before free lyric ( and chord ) site , stole their biz.
      
      This biggest and best:
      Hal Leonard Online
      Welcome to Hal Leonard Online, the internet home for the world's largest music print publisher. For over 60 years, we've been publishing and distributing ...
      www.halleonard.com/ -
      
      http://www.techdirt.com/article.php?sid=20100510/0404369357#c2148
      
      IT clear you are writing just to write at this stage , and any further disscusion is useless.
      
      You do not understand how ASCAP & Music Publishing industry functions, and probably never will.
      
      It takes careful reading, you are too busy writing.
      
      I have summed up my posts on my blog for those who wish
      read them.
      http://technopoliticalscience.blogspot.com/2010/05/artists-do-not-work-for-free.html
      
      bye
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- kbb, 16 Aug 2010 @ 2:22pm
  
  Re: Reason #18 not to buy legit music
  im willing to sell
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 4:08pm

Artists do not work for Free
If someone thinks enough of a piece of Art , -- written , painted or recorded-- to seek out their own copy , well the Artist does deserve $$$. Artists cannot eat publicity.

There must be some FAIR way ,,in todays techno-digitala world-- to fairly pay Artists for their works.

No one expects their house to get painted for free. Or the Doctor to heal you for free. But pro-musicians are always being asked to perform for free at friends parties, protests and etc. Does anyone ever ask the deli send free food ?

Art has real value , or else it would not get consumed. Think about how often a song or painting has really changed your day, and brightened your outlook , even for a brief moment.

The Artist who brightens your day deserves what any other craftsman labors for : respect and $$$$$.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- John Fenderson (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 4:19pm
  
  Re: Artists do not work for Free
  "But pro-musicians are always being asked to perform for free at friends parties, protests and etc."
  
  Not unique to musicians, of course. As a software engineer, I'm forever being asked for free help with the computers of acquaintances. Doctors I know are forever being asked for free medical advice. So on and so forth.
  
  None of this has anything to do with lyrics sites, though. Almost no lyrics by themselves have almost no value whatsoever, even as poetry. They only have value to already existing customers (the people who listen to the music they are a part of) or potentially as advertising to entice people to listen to the new-to-them music.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 4:26pm
    
    Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
    " Almost no lyrics by themselves have almost no value whatsoever, even as poetry."
    
    Then why look for them? The beauty of Lyrics is in the "eye" of the beholder. Dylan , the Beatles , Jackson Browne , Joni Mitchell,, great musicians all --- but those Lyrics are what is makes them memorable as artists. How many great intstrumental tracks make it into "top 40 " music history? Very few. Very , very few.
    
    Good lyrics do not come easy, ask any songwriter ( I am one )--- lots of medodies and chords all waiting for the right lyrics.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - John Fenderson (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 4:36pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
      I look for them because they add value to something I already have -- the song as a whole, which I've already paid for. The printed lyrics by themselves are of little value. Similar to the fact that the dashboard of my car has little value if I don't have the rest of the car.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 4:40pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        "The printed lyrics by themselves are of little value."
        
        Again , then why seek them out , copy , paste and print ?
        
        If someone does that they are proving the value.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        John Fenderson (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 4:46pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        I think you're missing my point. Their value is as part of a whole (the song itself, meaning lyrics and music). In theory, the writer of the lyrics got compensation for my enjoyment of his work when I paid for the song. Lyric sites are not ripping off songwriters, because the people who are interested in the lyrics are already their customers (excluding the use of the site to settle bar bets, anyway, but that's a pretty tiny market.)
        
        So, the value of lyrics is inseperable from the song itself, and the songwriter has already been compensated when the song was purchased.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 4:52pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        "So, the value of lyrics is inseperable from the song itself, and the songwriter has already been compensated when the song was purchased"
        
        In the old days , you bought the Record or tape AND ALSO the "offical" songbook with chords and lyrics , so you could wow your friends at parties with you guitar and voice.
        
        Today , I record {not download , but record) the song off of You Tube, and get the chords and lyrics online -- ALL for free.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 4:47pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        "The printed lyrics by themselves are of little value. "
        
        As a folksinger myself , who performed many covers,, those lyrics sheets are very valuable. Many band today use telepromters to the lead singer can remember their OWN lyrics !!! Chords are easy to remember, heck the blues and pop rock , are mostle 3 chord didies-- BUT the lyrics ,, they got to be perfect -- even every ,, "ooh" , and "sigh" , and "whooo", and a [ACCURATE !!] printed lyric sheet is the only way to go.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Andrew F (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 4:52pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
      You're barking up the wrong tree here Technopolitical. It's not that these sites are reproducing lyrics that some artist wrote and is trying to sell to another artist making a song.
      
      They're reproducing lyrics that are already part of songs. Taking down these lyric-sites only hurts those musicians because those lyric sites promote the songs.
      
      For example, let's say I hear a catchy tune on the radio but I don't catch the artist's name or song title. I do, however, remember the lyric -- e.g. "In New York, concrete jungle where dreams are made of." I search for this on Google and quickly find it's Jay-Z's and Alice Key's "Empire State of Mind." Without these lyric sites and all the effort those sites put into search engine optimization, I might not have found out what song that was and gone to purchase it. This happens all the time to me, and shutting down a lyric site only hurts the artist who wrote those lyrics.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 4:54pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        Again , in the pld days ,, you would got to the music store , ask the clerk , and buy the sheet music. ( Ot try to memeorize w/o buying.)
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Andrew F (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 5:04pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        Sheet music is distinct from the lyrics (although it has its own set of interesting questions). These lyric sites have only the lyrics -- they're not offering you the melodies and chords.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 5:21pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        As . I stated above ,, Lyrics are what makes a song memorable .
        
        Civil Right marches did not just Humm the tune to "We shall Overcome."
        
        Anti-war folks don't just hummm " Blowing in the Wind"
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Matt L, 10 May 2010 @ 5:06pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        And if the clerk at the music store didn't know the song you were SOL.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 5:15pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        "And if the clerk at the music store didn't know the song you were SOL."
        
        Well if people do not know their jobs well,, you got to another music store where they do. That's Capitalism
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Andrew F (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 5:23pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        Actually, what usually happened was you went home. And nobody makes any money.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 5:33pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        "Actually, what usually happened was you went home. And nobody makes any money."
        
        Actually not true . I may be spoil living in NYC ,, but the major sheet music stores ( not more than a half dozen left here , i guess), pride themselves on providing that kind of assistance. It is their bread and butter.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Matt L, 10 May 2010 @ 6:15pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        And how many of those sheet music stores today use Google to help them identify songs they are unfamiliar with?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 6:22pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        Probably all of them, Hopefully they go to the bands own website , and then sell the copyrighted songsheet.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Nate, 10 May 2010 @ 6:44pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
      Jesus, really? Because I can't tell what they're saying, that's why! Half the time they're community submitted lyrics so they might not even be right; the other half, they've been made publicly available. Have you EVER heard someone say, "Why should I bother to buy the song when I can look up what someone thinks the lyrics are for free"?
      
      This is the most idiotic objection I have heard to Techdirt yet. If your lyrics are secret, you have to confirm a third party's accuracy to go after them, and then wouldn't that defy the whole point? Hell, why even write them in the first place? How many coincident lyrics qualify as infringement? This should be established beforehand. Am I allowed to sing the song on the street? How about mention the artist without licensing his name?
      
      If you're an "artist" and you feel this way, think of a different word to describe yourself with.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Hephaestus (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 7:02am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
      "Good lyrics do not come easy, ask any songwriter ( I am one )--- lots of medodies and chords all waiting for the right lyrics."
      
      I have an app that takes single lines from poems, songs, etc. It took a weekend to write. By just randomly choosing a line to add to the song and saying yeah or nay to that line you end up with lyrics better than most of the song writers out there today.
      
      You are not unique, talent doesnt enter into it, and what you do can be replaced by automation. In other words get a day job, and stop thinking you are entitled to anything.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Technopolitical (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 8:08am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free... "I have an app that takes single lines from poems, songs, etc.
        "I have an app that takes single lines from poems, songs, etc. It took a weekend to write. By just randomly choosing a line to add to the song and saying yeah or nay to that line you end up with lyrics better than most of the song writers out there today. "
        
        An infinite number of monkeys on infinite typwriters ,,, or an infinite number of geeks with apps,,,,.. Ain't never gonna write the Lyrics to "My Girl" .
        
        Writing lyrics are not just words. The words ,, even down to the vowel sonds , got to fit the mood and melody of the song. Very hard to do , and it takes talent.
        
        What I am talking about here ,,are those great artists who wrote the great words to many of those classic rock and pop songs of yester-year -- but that are still covered by copyright. Those Lyricist who put the words to the sondtracks of our lifes, deserve some change if you see out their lyrics -- very often in your line of work , if you are a teacher (song lyrics and the civil rights / movement ) , camp counselor ( for that song contest in color war ) ,, or a musician like me who is always downloading lyrics for the cover tunes the band does.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        PaulT (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 9:47am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free... "I have an app that takes single lines from poems, songs, etc.
        "An infinite number of monkeys on infinite typwriters ,,, or an infinite number of geeks with apps,,,,.. Ain't never gonna write the Lyrics to "My Girl" ."
        
        Yes, they will. It might take a while, but the right words arranged in the right order will create those lyrics eventually.
        
        Anyway, you seem to making a major fallacy again - while you're thinking about "classic" old songs, that's not the argument here. A song is a song, and the writer of your favourite old song has exactly the same rights as the writer of the worst song. If the quality of the original work is high, the songwriter gets to command higher prices for future work, not use the old song's non-commercial usage as a retirement fund.
        
        "What I am talking about here ,,are those great artists who wrote the great words to many of those classic rock and pop songs of yester-year"
        
        Again, that's what YOU'RE talking about. I'm talking about someone who wants to find out the title of that stupid song they heard last night about "lovely lady lumps", who the artist was they heard singing or which song got sampled in the dance tune they listened to. Nobody using lyrics sites for those purposes is ever going to buy a song sheet, but they might buy a record - if they can work out what it was. The artist still gets paid for their lyrics, albeit indirectly.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 10:01am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free... "I have an app that takes single lines from poems, songs, etc.
        "Nobody using lyrics sites for those purposes is ever going to buy a song sheet, but they might buy a record - if they can work out what it was. The artist still gets paid for their lyrics, albeit indirectly."
        
        Not true . People use the lyrics for many reasons ,, often professional ones,,, and these lyric sites cut othe orginal songwriter-lyricist. Simply not fair -- and also illegal.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        PaulT (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 10:29am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free... "I have an app that takes single lines from poems, songs, etc.
        "Not true"
        
        Erm, no - absolutely 100% irrefutable true.
        
        Notice that I said "for those purposes". A person using a lyrics site to work out the title of a song is not going to agree to pay for that service online, let alone agree to buy a sheet of the lyrics just to buy the title.
        
        I have NEVER bought a song sheet - I'm not a musician so it's useless to me. I have, however, bought music as a direct result of numerous lyrics sites coming up in a Google search pointing me toward a particular song. I believe you'll find that this is the most common use of the sites.
        
        I also do find it amusing that you claim to be a writer but have no grasp of punctuation. ONE comma at a time, please.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 10:36am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free... "I have an app that takes single lines from poems, songs, etc.
        "I have NEVER bought a song sheet - I'm not a musician so it's useless to me."
        
        But there are many people who DO find song lyrics useful -- often in their line of work.
        
        "I also do find it amusing that you claim to be a writer but have no grasp of punctuation. ONE comma at a time, please."
        
        Writing for a web post comment is not formal writing,,,, i like commas,,,,, gives the readers pause to think and reflect,,,,,,,, sort of punctual rest beats.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        PaulT (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 10:41am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free... "I have an app that takes single lines from poems, songs, etc.
        "But there are many people who DO find song lyrics useful -- often in their line of work."
        
        I'm sure there are, but I doubt that this is the majority of users of those sites. Most people use them to search for songs or as a repository for their media player to use to get the lyrics that used to come free with the music.
        
        Unless you have some form of figures to show that I'm wrong about that, I have to assume that non-musicians are the majority of users. In that case, the lyricist should still get paid either from sales of the music, of performance rights, or other means that already exist. The lyrics alone are worthless to most people, and thus it's silly to try charging for them.
        
        "gives the readers pause to think and reflect,,,,,,,, sort of punctual rest beats."
        
        Actually, it's annoying and makes you look like a moron who hasn't learned the English language properly.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 4:38pm
        
        Most people use them to search for songs or as a repository for their media player to use to get the lyrics that used to come free with the music.
        Exactly my point.
        
        When you bought the Album , tape , or CD long ago ,, or today a LEGAL paid Download ( rare ) --the lyric writer does got a cut.
        
        However the illegal downloading of songs cuts out all of the Artists involved.
        
        Songwriters, Producers, and Recording Artist.
        
        BUT these for-profit lyric sites , they do recover some -- but not all -- of the royalties lost to illegal downloading , for the lyricist at least.
        
        Come to think of it:
        
        Should then the Lyric sites should pay EVERYONE , who worked on ANY version of the song in question?
        
        No.
        
        Because I only want the LYRICS.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        PaulT (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 10:15pm
        
        Re: Most people use them to search for songs or as a repository for their media player to use to get the lyrics that used to come free with the music.
        "However the illegal downloading of songs cuts out all of the Artists involved."
        
        ...which is why I'm advocating legally purchasing the songs. Songs which I need the lyrics sites to identify.
        
        You're confusing 2 issues and making yourself out to be rather stupid in the process.
        
        "Should then the Lyric sites should pay EVERYONE , who worked on ANY version of the song in question?"
        
        I can't even follow what you're trying to say here. Try making some sense, please.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 11:36pm
        
        Re: Re: Most people use them to search for songs or as a repository for their media player to use to get the lyrics that used to come free with the music.
        "I can't even follow what you're trying to say here. Try making some sense, please."
        
        I think it is pretty clear,, you should also "legally purchase" the song lyric , if that is ALL you need.
        
        Or at least make sure the Lyricist gets a cut from the $$-makeing site that gave you those copyrighted lyrics
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        PaulT (profile), 12 May 2010 @ 3:37am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Most people use them to search for songs or as a repository for their media player to use to get the lyrics that used to come free with the music.
        OK, then. Please point me to the site where I can do this. I don't think I've ever seen a site that *sells* lyrics alone - and no, buying a physical song book does not meet that need, even if I was willing to pay the price for it (which I'm not as such a book would cost several times the price of the song).
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 12 May 2010 @ 4:34am
        
        Please point me to the site where I can do this. I don't think I've ever seen a site that *sells* lyrics alone
        Those who sell the lyrics directly , they are called "music publishers" The ones that print the songbooks we USED to BUY , befre free lyric ( and chord ) site , stole their biz.
        
        This biggest and best:
        Hal Leonard Online
        Welcome to Hal Leonard Online, the internet home for the world's largest music print publisher. For over 60 years, we've been publishing and distributing ...
        www.halleonard.com/ -
        =========================================
        But this whole thread is about for PROFIT lyric websites , that let you "steal" the lyrics w/o roylties being paid to the lyricist.
        
        If you Want the lyrics , and want to pay fairly , wherte the lyricist gets royalties , go the music publisher's website and order the lyric sheet.
        
        OR , get the lyric sites to pay fair and just roylities , just like radio stations that broadcast songs, advertisers that use songs, and TV shows that have music performed on them
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 16 May 2010 @ 8:20pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free... "I have an app that takes single lines from poems, songs, etc.
        However , a couple of dozen monkeys, with a dozen apps, ,
        would in a few days make TechDirt.
        
        Quicker if they work through lunches.
        -----------
        
        Stay tuned for More epidsodes of :
        "Monkeys with Apps"
        ------
        MWA is copyrighted work 2010.
        All rights to which, will be defended and enforced.
        
        (try me)
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Roseman (profile), 27 Mar 2012 @ 5:20am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
      Good lyrics do not come easily. Adverb required!
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 10 May 2010 @ 4:24pm
  
  Re: Artists do not work for Free
  In this case they're not asking the artist to work for free, they're retrieving and posting the lyrics on their own time and labor.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 4:29pm
    
    Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
    Not true ,, most of these lyrics sites , are fols looking to make $$ by posting copywrited lyrics online, w/o artist permission-- that was the main point of the original NY TIMES article. I think that point was missed in the post here
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 4:31pm
    
    Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
    Why retrieve a lyric that has no value to you ? If you seek out art it has value to you. That means artist desrves to be paid. Period.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 10 May 2010 @ 5:04pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
      You do not know the difference between value and price. Period.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 5:42pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        Ok ,, I will bite ; please explain the "difference between value and price" -- in the context of this discussion.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Phillip Vector (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 5:45pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        Value = What someone feels the item is worth.
        Price = What someone will pay for it.
        
        I recently bought a game for $100. A board game that's been out of print for 10 years or so.
        
        The Price was $100. It's what the seller felt was a fair offer (and it was).
        
        The Value was around $300 for me. It's what I would've paid for the game in that condition.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 6:08pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        "The Value was around $300 for me. It's what I would've paid for the game in that condition"
        
        You should sent the extra $200 to whomever invented the game !!! Prove its value to you that way !
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Phillip Vector (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 6:25pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        So assuming you have a car, considering the years of enjoyment from it you will get, did you send the difference to the makers of the car since your value was higher then you paid for it?
        
        Or did you buy something that had an inflated price and you bought it when your value for it was lower?
        
        or did you get the EXACT value and price balanced out? Quite unlikely since you would need to calculate exactly how long you would have the car for (to the day).
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Matt L, 10 May 2010 @ 6:28pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        "The Price was $100. It's what the seller felt was a fair offer (and it was). The Value was around $300 for me. It's what I would've paid for the game in that condition" Hooray for consumer surplus! "You should sent the extra $200 to whomever invented the game !!! Prove its value to you that way !" Why would one forgo $200 in consumer surplus? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_surplus
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 6:54pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        For any artist Value equals Price.
        
        Art does not decay.
        
        The medium on which it is produced may age of wear,,
        
        ... but the Beatles did not say look , you bought Abbey road in 1970 on vinyl ,, Now we will give you a free lifetime update on the medium.
        
        No ,, we bought the tape , then the CD , then the remastered CD , and soon again the repressed vinyl
        
        http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/10/business/media/10audio.html?ref=technology
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Matt L, 10 May 2010 @ 7:03pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        "For any artist Value equals Price"
        
        That's fine. The artist just shouldn't expect to sell much if their price is higher than what the consumer is willing to pay.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 7:34pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        `you just proved my point : For Art ,,, PRICE equals Value.
        
        A singular rare Picasso cost now 106 million.
        
        IF there where only one copy of Abbey Road , listen-able to only one person at a time , it too would be worth 106 million. Though I bet someone would pay 106 million for the orginal studio acid tape.
        
        And the hand written lyrics always sell well too.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Matt L, 10 May 2010 @ 8:20pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        How did I prove your point?
        
        Value, as this discussion should show, is subjective. What one person values at $300 another may value at $100 or less, as in Phillip Vector's board game example.
        
        While the price of that Picasso may be $106 million, its value might be much greater than that to the owner, or to many people, significantly less.
        
        Here's an article worth reading that discusses art, value and prices.
        
        http://mises.org/daily/2308
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 9:10pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        with non -"ART" products , where supply and demand may come into play ,, value and price may differ in capital terms.
        
        With "ART" , I put forth , being it really has not "value" ,-- you can't eat art, or funtionally use it so its "Value" , is simply waht people are willing to pat for it.
        
        -- ( yes clothes ,, for example can be Art, but clothes do not have to be Art, and with clothing Fuction not Form is what matters. Art is pure "Form" with not real economic "fucntion".)----
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 10 May 2010 @ 10:42pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        The fashion industry works fine without intellectual property laws.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Greg, 10 May 2010 @ 7:43pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        Jeez, Technopolitical. You are doing us proper artists a great disservice with your idiotic rants here.
        
        Firstly, the music has great value without the lyrics. I have no idea what a lot of the lyrics are to the songs I listen to. I stay purposefully ignorant a percentage of the time because the drivel some singers write actually detracts from the song.
        
        But back to the point at hand, I would be thankful for the free publicity of a lyrics site (or sheet music/tabs site for that matter) and I don't see why the people that compile the lyrics and post them on a site shouldn't be able to derive a revenue stream from advertising etc. for their hard work. Perhaps you should attempt the same...
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 8:10pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        "Firstly, the music has great value without the lyrics."
        
        I think Bob Dylan would disagree !!
        
        "I have no idea what a lot of the lyrics are to the songs I listen to."
        
        Thats why people go to lyric sites. That why there are ads on Lyric sites. That how lyric site make money. That is why the lyricist should get some of that $$$.
        
        I stay purposefully ignorant a percentage of the time...."
        
        A large percentage of the time it seems.
        
        (Tf I turn this post into a song , and make ooddles of $$ with it ,, would you want a cut ,, or can I have your "drival" for free? )
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 16 May 2010 @ 8:30pm
        
        No ,, we bought the tape , then the CD , then the remastered CD , and soon again the repressed vinyl
        BTW geeks,, now is the time to get in on the ground floor , for the next wave ,, Miro -Analog-Music-Players. (MAMuPs).
        
        Hint : nano-tech
        
        Do it now , before "Monkeys with Apps" beat you to it.
        
        -----
        This has been episode 2 of "Monkeys with Apps."
        Stay tuned for More epidsodes of :
        "Monkeys with Apps"
        ------
        MWA is copyrighted work 2010.
        All rights to which, will be defended and enforced. Though my Mom will call first-- to lecture you, before we sue.)
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Phillip Vector (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 5:42pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
      So by that logic, anything sought out should be paid for. So if I want to find the population of the city of Portland, Oregon, I should pay the city itself money?
      
      If I seek out ... well.. anything I type into google, I should pay for it. Also, not to the creator of the site, but to the person who first wrote it?
      
      Is this seriously your stance? I look up the definition of "Black hole" and I owe money to NASA all of a sudden (or would that be websters)?
      
      Really?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 6:09pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        No. Some things are compiled to be put in public domain.
        
        song lyrics are not one of them.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Phillip Vector (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 8:08pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        Hey.. Worked for Happy Birthday.. Didn't it?
        
        Oh wait.. It didn't.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 10 May 2010 @ 10:43pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        The music is in the public domain but the lyrics are not. The sounds are but not the words. Weird.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 11:55pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        because you cannot copy right chords,, the "blues" are the same 3 chords. Medoldey can be copyrighted , but as we learned with the George Harrison " My Sweet Lord" vs. 'He So fine" legal fiacso , it is a murky terriorty.
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Sweet_Lord
        
        With LYRICs there is no murkiness.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 10 May 2010 @ 4:26pm
  
  Re: Artists do not work for Free
  Did you actually read the article? Nobody disputes artists have a right to be fairly compensated for their work. This was specifically about the stranglehold the music industry would like to have over the online websites that post free databases of searchable song lyrics. How does this in any way take away from the artists' bottom line?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 4:38pm
    
    Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
    "post free databases of searchable song lyrics. How does this in any way take away from the artists' bottom line?"
    
    Because you used to have to got to the sheet music store and buy the sheet music. That is how the songwriters got paid ,, through publishing rights. Songwriters and lyricist , are often NOT the musical preformer, and sheet music sales where often how they made much of their $$
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 10 May 2010 @ 5:05pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
      Things change. Get over it.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 5:45pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        But change should be for the better ,, for the benifit of the working artist.
        
        If some is making adv. $$ posting my lyrics ,, i deserve a cut.
        
        It is that simple.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Modplan (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 5:49pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        Change should be for the benefit of society.
        
        Shutting down services that anyone with a pair of working ears can do and add too on the idea that licensing lyric sheets might make major money isn't beneficial to society.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 6:14pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        "Shutting down services that anyone with a pair of working ears can do"
        
        It is not that east to pick out and memorize lyrics just by listening. That is way these lyric sites exist -- they provide a service. Lyric sites make money on ads, by providing that service. Artists deserve a cut of the $$
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Modplan (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 6:32pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        Songwriters make money from being paid to write new songs or from deals to get a cut of the royalty.
        
        They do not and should not get paid for compilation of basic facts and services that are provided entirely by users. Practically every lyrics site depends on external users providing the lyrics. Songwriters should be paying them for the work they do in providing a valuable tool and service that makes their songs more enjoyable and who do the heavy lifting they do so the bands and song writers don't have to.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 7:03pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        If the lyric site generates income ,, the lyricist should get a cut . I do not live off of people loving or respecting or publizing my art,, i live off of $$$ generated by my art.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 10 May 2010 @ 10:59pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        Don't forget to pay the inventor of the keyboard you used to type that drivel.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - zbeeblebrox, 10 May 2010 @ 5:38pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
      None of these lyrics sites have sheet music. None of these sites are even stores. You aren't making money off these posted lyrics; neither are they. All they care about is views. And all the viewers care about is finding the song they're looking for, and possibly what the screamer is saying in the refrain. And in the end, the singers don't lose anything, because there was nothing to lose in the first place.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 6:15pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        Again, if the lyric site is generating income for the site owner, that the Artists deserve some of that $$$.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        slander (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 9:27pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        I build ships for a living. Every time a ship that I built offloads its cargo, I should get paid for it.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 9:50pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        you do , it was in the originial price of the ship.
        
        And if the ship works well , with years of good service ,, they will come back and buy more ships!
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        slander (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 7:19am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        Good.
        
        You wrote some lyrics. You got paid for it. It was in the original price of the song.
        
        And if the song sells well, they will come back to you and buy more songs.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 8:14am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        Not that easy , and here I am thinking of older songwriters and lyricists . who wrote the words to the classic tunes that many people seek out ,,,so "oh Darling ,, Stand by Me..."
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Phillip Vector (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 10:15am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        You can't have it both ways.. Old or New, it doesn't matter. What matters is that you can't say the ship builder shouldn't get money, but songwriters should. There is no (legal) difference between the 2. Both made an item and both got paid when it was sold. Neither deserve to keep getting paid for it over and over.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 10:39am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        Again ,, broacasters have always payed -per- play ---with advertisers $$$ . A lyric site should too!!
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 10 May 2010 @ 6:32pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
      That was almost NEVER true..
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - PaulT (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 4:01am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
      What if you don't want the sheet music, you just want to know what the moron behind the mic is actually singing? There are also sites dedicated to compiling commonly misheard lyrics.
      
      What if you just want to know what the song's called so you can buy a copy? Are you really saying that a person should have to locate a sheet music store just to find out a song's title? That's not likely to happen.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Technopolitical (profile), 12 May 2010 @ 7:18pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        "What if you just want to know what the song's called so you can buy a copy? Are you really saying that a person should have to locate a sheet music store just to find out a song's title? That's not likely to happen."
        
        Why not? That is the craft and trade of the sheet music store. That is the niche they fill in the economic web. Esp, if one needs the song for a professional reason -- like a Music Therapist.
        
        Even if it is only important to you, just as a loving music fan ,, or maybe even because you just can't sleep till you know that song title -- and/or the NAME of the Lyricist Artist too for that matter -- Then , Yes , you seek out a sheet-music store to get your relief.
        
        And then legally buy the Album , SongSheet or BOTH.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        PaulT (profile), 13 May 2010 @ 8:35am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        "That is the craft and trade of the sheet music store"
        
        I have absolutely no idea where the nearest sheet music store is to me, if one even exists in my town (or even my country, to be honest - I'm not American and live 30 miles from the nearest large city. If they do, they are not going to carry sheet music of every song ever recorded. Maybe every one ever printed, but only a fraction have such books in existence. You argument is utterly ridiculous even if I was willing and able to go to a store to find out the title of a song I heard - I'm not. I'll just forget about the song and no money will be given to the artist or lyricist.
        
        Got it?
        
        "And then legally buy the Album , SongSheet or BOTH."
        
        Again, how? I'm not driving 30 miles to the nearest city to find the name of a song they may or may not know, nor should I have to. Once again, your attempts to increase earning would actually turn a small profit into absolutely nothing.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 13 May 2010 @ 11:11am
        
        any further disscusion is useless.
        stated before you asked :
        
        Please point me to the site where I can do this. I don't think I've ever seen a site that *sells* lyrics alone"
        
        I replied :
        Those who sell the lyrics directly , they are called "music publishers" The ones that print the songbooks we USED to BUY , before free lyric ( and chord ) site , stole their biz.
        
        This biggest and best:
        Hal Leonard Online
        Welcome to Hal Leonard Online, the internet home for the world's largest music print publisher. For over 60 years, we've been publishing and distributing ...
        www.halleonard.com/ -
        
        http://www.techdirt.com/article.php?sid=20100510/0404369357#c2148
        
        IT clear you are writing just to write at this stage , and any further disscusion is useless.
        
        You do not understand how ASCAP & Music Publishing industry functions, and probably never will.
        
        It takes careful reading, you are too busy writing.
        
        I have summed up my posts on my blog for those who wish
        read them.
        http://technopoliticalscience.blogspot.com/2010/05/artists-do-not-work-for-free.html
        
        bye
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        PaulT (profile), 14 May 2010 @ 3:31am
        
        Re: any further disscusion is useless.
        Great, so instead of answering my pertinent questions, you retreat to your own blog. For the record, I have stated that I accept the idea that anybody using these sites for professional services should buy the lyrics - that option is not available online, as you've admitted. What I have said is the following:
        
        - I have questioned your constant and (to my mind) highly unlikely assumption that music professionals make up the majority of the users of lyric sites.
        - That most people use the sites to decypher lyrics or find song titles, not to use the lyrics professionally.
        - That most of these people would not buy a song book as its value to them does not exist.
        - That lyric sites actually drive money to the artist and lyricist that they would not otherwise get
        - That forcing most of these sites to pay will drive them offline, and lose this positive effect with no increase of sales in song books.
        
        I'm not driving traffic to your blog, but I will leave this here: as an experiment, I tried putting the main lyric and title of the song I happen to have playing on my iPod right now (Rooster by Alice In Chains) into the HAL site (a company I had never previously heard of).
        
        Nothing. It returned 2 unrelated songs with the word Rooster, and nothing with the main lyric. I tried Google - every result relates to the song I looked for. If I wanted to know who the song was by so I could buy it, Google gave me the answer while the publisher offered 2 $1.95 documents I would have to buy to see if they were the correct song. Your magical lyricist would have lost money if the lyric sites were not available. That is all.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 14 May 2010 @ 1:05pm
        
        A Bill of Rights for Songwriters and Composers Created by ASCAP, the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers
        A Bill of Rights for Songwriters and Composers
        Created by ASCAP, the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers
        
        http://www.ascap.com/rights/
        
        just as citizens of a nation must be educated about their rights to ensure that they are protected and upheld, so too must those who compose words and music know the rights that support their own acts of creation. Without these rights, which directly emanate from the U.S. Constitution, many who dream of focusing their talents and energies on music creation would be economically unable to do so - an outcome that would diminish artistic expression today and for future generations.
        
        At this time, when so many forces are seeking to diminish copyright protections and devalue artistic expression, this Bill of Rights for Songwriters and Composers looks to clarify the entitlements that every music creator enjoys.
        
        We have the right to be compensated for the use of our creative works, and share in the revenues that they generate.
        
        We have the right to license our works and control the ways in which they are used.
        
        We have the right to withhold permission for uses of our works on artistic, economic or philosophical grounds.
        
        We have the right to protect our creative works to the fullest extent of the law from all forms of piracy, theft and unauthorized use, which deprive us of our right to earn a living based on our creativity.
        
        We have the right to choose when and where our creative works may be used for free.
        
        We have the right to develop, document and distribute our works through new media channels - while retaining the right to a share in all associated profits.
        
        We have the right to choose the organizations we want to represent us and to join our voices together to protect our rights and negotiate for the value of our music.
        
        We have the right to earn compensation from all types of "performances," including direct, live renditions as well as indirect recordings, broadcasts, digital streams and more.
        
        We have the right to decline participation in business models that require us to relinquish all or part of our creative rights - or which do not respect our right to be compensated for our work.
        
        We have the right to advocate for strong laws protecting our creative works, and demand that our government vigorously uphold and protect our rights.
        
        Make Your Voice Heard!
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 14 May 2010 @ 1:33pm
        
        Great, so instead of answering my pertinent questions, you retreat to your own blog. For the record, I have stated that I accept the idea that anybody using these sites for professional services should buy the lyrics - that option is not available online,
        http://www.halleonard.com/
        
        Welcome to Hal Leonard Online, the internet home for the world's largest music print publisher. For over 60 years, we've been publishing and distributing publications for virtually every type of instrument and ensemble. ***Click on the category buttons above to browse our most popular product categories or go to our advanced search page to find a particular title.****
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 14 May 2010 @ 1:41pm
        
        Re: Great, so instead of answering my pertinent questions, you retreat to your own blog. For the record, I have stated that I accept the idea that anybody using these sites for professional services should buy the lyrics - that option is not available onl
        COPYRIGHT
        Thank you for your interest in the Copyright Department of Hal Leonard Corporation
        Hal Leonard represents, in print, some of the world's best known and most respected publishers, artists, and writers. Please see "Frequently Asked Questions" for a more complete list.
        
        As the print representative for these publishers, Hal Leonard Corporation is responsible for authorizing print-related usages such as photocopying, arranging or adapting, and reprinting ***lyrics*** and/or music
        
        http://www.halleonard.com/permissions/index.jsp
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 11 May 2010 @ 4:10am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
      Sheet music is hardly the same as printing the lyrics to a song. Sheet music details all the chords and notes and tempos so a person can accurately recreate a performance, not so they can figure out why Sting said "I'm a pool-hall ace" in "Every Breath You Take." But as a 'performer' I assume you expect to get paid for every waking thought or grunt. I assume you pay royalties for all the 'covers' you perform, correct?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Technopolitical (profile), 12 May 2010 @ 11:36am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        .you cannot copy right chords,, the "blues" are the same 3 chords.
        Melody can be copyrighted , but as we learned with the George Harrison " My Sweet Lord" vs. 'He So fine" legal fiacso , it is a murky territory.
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Sweet_Lord
        
        With LYRICs there is no murkiness.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Technopolitical (profile), 12 May 2010 @ 11:38am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        I assume you pay royalties for all the 'covers' you perform, correct?
        
        Yes the songwriters did get paid!!! Before the internet , I bought the songbook,, and any bar I played in got an yearly visit from ASCAP et. al.,, to collect the royalties for the song the cover artists preform
        
        http://www.ascap.com/about/payment/index.html
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Karl (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 5:34pm
  
  Re: Artists do not work for Free
  Nobody is saying artists have to work for free. But on the flipside, artists don't automatically deserve to get paid, either - they have to give consumers a reason to pay them. I've worked for many years as a musician without benefiting financially, because I don't produce a type of music that is commercial enough to support me. So it goes.
  
  But here, we're not talking about musicians not getting paid. They will not get paid for the lyrics in any case - they have to write and release music.
  
  Most musicians post their lyrics online for all to read. If they don't, it's usually for time/energy reasons (or they don't do their own websites). Not a single artist that I know has ever had a problem with people simply reading the lyrics, not even the ones that are rabidly against filesharing.
  
  It's not like these sites are competing with any products on the market. Selling lyrics (after they've been released) has never generated any revenue for anyone before. But suddenly, the copyright holders feel they deserve to get income from it. This is obviously just a money grab, an attempt to generate a new income stream by blackmailing lyric sites with the threat of infringement suits.
  
  You also seem to be confusing "lyrics" with "songbooks" or "fakebooks." These sites don't post the music at all - no chord changes, no tabs, no notation, just lyrics.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 5:53pm
    
    Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
    "It's not like these sites are competing with any products on the market. Selling lyrics (after they've been released) has never generated any revenue for anyone before."
    
    Completly false. Music publishing -- songbooks with chords and lyrics -- generated income for songwriter and/or lyricist.
    ============
    
    "I've worked for many years as a musician without benefiting financially, because I don't produce a type of music that is commercial enough to support me."
    
    Are you TRYING to make comercial music ? Or just please your own self ? If you are trying to be comercial , and are not , well , not everone can be a top 40 artist. Got to be the best of the best.
    
    Which is why many great musicians and songwriters are housepainters , waiters, and bartenders
    
    But the ones who worked hard , learned their craft , and wrote the songs we sing in the shower-- they deserve the $$$. Folks loke Neil Diamond and Carole King and where songwriters first-- but really got no fame or $$$ till they became recording artists themselves.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Karl (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 7:39pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
      Completly false. Music publishing -- songbooks with chords and lyrics
      
      I guess you missed the part where THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY'RE GIVING AWAY. Hard to miss, since I pointed it out explicitly.
      
      Have you heard of any songbook that did not have chords, or tabs, or notes of any kind? Where there was absolutely nothing other than lyrics? I've never seen one. If I published one, I certainly wouldn't expect it to sell.
      
      Nobody will ever go to a lyrics site and say, "well, I guess I don't need to buy the songbook now."
      
      If you are trying to be comercial , and are not , well , not everone can be a top 40 artist.
      
      My point was not "oh, poor me." My point was: I worked just as hard as some Top 40 artists. Do I automatically deserve to get paid as much as they do?
      
      No, I don't. Nobody "deserves to get paid" for their work. They only deserve to get people to pay them for their work.
      
      Commercial songwriter or not, everyone knows that if your music isn't as popular, you won't get paid as much. Duh.
      
      And again, that's beside the point anyway, since neither musicians nor songwriters have ever gotten money solely from lyrics.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 8:28pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        "And again, that's beside the point anyway, since neither musicians nor songwriters have ever gotten money solely from lyrics."
        
        Many bands have "lyicist -- The Grateful Dead's Robert Hunter is a prime example.
        
        I easily remember chords , and often can just pick them off the recording by listening,,,
        
        but those lyrics , I always forget the precise wording -- which is very important to a good song.
        
        then of course ,, with those mulitverse Bob Dylan songs , where verse order is CRITICAL is properly performing the song --- "Tangled up in Blue" fails is you do the verses out of order ,, and trust,, me someone in the crowd will notice , and pulll that tip right out of the tip jar.
        
        Chords , I do not need . Lyrics I need. Now Bob Dylan was nice enough to put all his lyrics on his website -- love ya Bob,, but for the REAL words to "louie Louie" I got to go to the music store and buy them--- unless I can get them FREE online. Free except for the ads on the lyric site, which are paying to be there ,, and I might just click on one,, and maybe make a purchase.
        
        So , I get my Lyrics.
        
        The ad gets a click-- making $$ for the site owner,,
        
        and the advertised gets a sale ,,
        
        and the Lyicist for "Louie Louie"....
        
        gets Bubkas!!!!
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Karl (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 10:43am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        Please stop using the "songbook" comparison. 99.9% of people who buy songbooks do so to get the sheet music, not the lyrics. And once again, lyrics sites do not publish the music. They do not compete with songbooks.
        
        In any case, most people who visit these sites are not fellow musicians trying to learn the songs. They are fans, who go there because they can't find the lyrics anywhere else.
        
        Nor do these sites make a ton of money. They may have advertising, but anyone in the web business knows that advertisements usually don't even cover the cost of webhosting.
        
        If they did make a ton of money, artists would have been doing the exact same thing since the inception of the internet. Hell, if selling lyrics (by themselves) made any money at all, they would have been sold for eighty years now in paper-and-ink format.
        
        And there is nothing stopping songwriters from starting their own lyric sites. I'm sure whatever paltry income they get from the site would still dwarf the almost nonexistent amount of royalties they get from selling songbooks.
        
        Demanding royalties from these sites won't give the songwriters more money. It will shut down those sites, which will lose money for songwriters. Not just from the potential revenue those sites bring in, but from fans who jump ship because the songwriters are such dicks.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 12 May 2010 @ 11:55am
        
        And there is nothing stopping songwriters from starting their own lyric sites. I'm sure whatever paltry income they get from the site would still dwarf the almost nonexistent amount of royalties they get from selling songbooks.
        ASCAP already does it for them.
        http://www.ascap.com/about/
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 12 May 2010 @ 4:30pm
        
        "Louie Louie": Artists do not work for Free
        "Louie Louie" is an American rock 'n' roll song written by Richard Berry in 1955. It has become a standard in pop and rock, with hundreds of versions recorded by different artists. The song is written in the style of a Jamaican ballad; and tells, in simple verse-chorus form, the first-person story of a Jamaican sailor returning to the island to see his lady love. The singer brags of his "fine little girl" to the Louie of the title, presumably a bartender.
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louie_Louie
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 10 May 2010 @ 6:29pm
  
  Re: Artists do not work for Free
  Jerk
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- DS, 10 May 2010 @ 8:53pm
  
  Re: Artists do not work for Free
  No, this would be more like asking for a list of paints used to paint a house.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- PaulT (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 3:40am
  
  Re: Artists do not work for Free
  Heh, I read this article and wondered how quickly a moron would come in like this...
  
  True story: yesterday, I was thinking about a song and fancied grabbing a copy, but couldn't remember what it was called. Without an artist or title, iTunes and other "legal" sources are utterly useless. So, I type in a line of the chorus I remembered, and up comes a couple of song titles. I then go to YouTube and listen to the songs until I'm sure that I've found the one I was thinking of. Then I bought the song (In The Air (Axwell remix) by TV Rock, in case you're interested).
  
  Without lyrics sites, Google would have been useless as well. I would never have bought the song at that time, because I wasn't able to identify it. I might have caught it on radio or TV later on, but the impulse urge to buy would have gone.
  
  The artist got paid, and got paid BECAUSE of the existence of lyrics sites. You're arguing that the artists should not be paid because someone else might get an indirect cut.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Karl (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 11:02am
    
    Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
    So, by Technopolitical's argument, the lyric site should get a cut of the song's sale. After all, the site worked hard, and the artist made money off of them, so the site deserves to get paid by the artist.
    
    Right?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Technopolitical (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 11:49am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
      "So, by Technopolitical's argument, the lyric site should get a cut of the song's sale. After all, the site worked hard, and the artist made money off of them, so the site deserves to get paid by the artist.Right?"
      
      No, not right. The artist--- by writing good lyrics , that someone desires a copy of -- is driving traffic to the website.
      
      Website makes money on that lyric ,, website owe lyricist $$.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Karl (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 1:06pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
        he artist (...) is driving traffic to the website.
        
        And the website is driving sales of the music.
        
        You say the website makes money off of the songwriter's efforts, therefore they should pay the songwriter. But the songwriter is also making money off the website, therefore, by your logic, the artist should pay the website.
        
        Or are you one of those people that think that webmasters shouldn't get paid for their work?
        
        Actually, a few of the lyrics sites do have something like this set up. Somewhere on the lyrics page, they have a "buy this at Amazon" link. This is an affiliate program; Amazon pays the site some minor amount of money for each clickthrough and purchase. (This is taken from Amazon's share.) Amazon makes a tiny bit less, but it's still worth it because the site users bought albums from Amazon instead of from someone else. And the songwriters and copyright holders still get their full share of that sale.
        
        I find nothing wrong with this system. But you suggest that the site owners should pay the songwriters an additional fee above and beyond the sale that the website generated. And your suggested fee would only shut down those sites, meaning the songwriters would lose out on any sales that would have been generated.
        
        So not only is your suggested fee unfair, it would end up losing money for songwriters. It's a lose-lose scenario.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 3:28pm
        
        But the songwriter is also making money off the website,
        How ?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Karl (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 5:04pm
        
        Re: But the songwriter is also making money off the website,
        You mean, "how" is the artist making money from the website?
        
        Read the original post by PaulT that I replied to. Because of online lyric sites, TV Rock made a sale that would not have occurred had those sites not existed.
        
        Does TV Rock owe the lyric websites money? By your logic, they should. The online sites helped make a sale, so they're owed a commission on that sale.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 12 May 2010 @ 7:25pm
        
        Re: Re: But the songwriter is also making money off the website,
        my comment answer farther down thread @ :
        http://www.techdirt.com/article.php?sid=20100510/0404369357#c1959
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Vincent Clement, 11 May 2010 @ 4:48am
  
  Re: Artists do not work for Free
  Except when I have someone paint my house, I'm not expected to pay each and every time I 'enjoy' the paint. Should GM or Ford receive a percentage of income when one of their vehicles is used for commercial purposes?
  
  Your so-called 'Artist', seems to believe they are entitled to payment each and every time I 'enjoy' their art. Listen to a song? Pay the musicians, pay the songwriter, pay the lyricist, pay this, pay that. It never ends.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Technopolitical (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 8:19am
    
    Re: Re: Artists do not work for Free
    "Your so-called 'Artist', seems to believe they are entitled to payment each and every time I 'enjoy' their art. Listen to a song? Pay the musicians, pay the songwriter, pay the lyricist, pay this, pay that. It never ends."
    
    Radio Stations , TV shows , Advertisers , and Bars with cover bands , ALL pay for play -- to the Artists ALL the time.
    
    If you get the lyrics from a profit making website , same deal should be there .
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 May 2010 @ 4:14pm

Spineless chump here (raising hand). I BUY music all the time after hearing something on the radio, or more often, after hearing a song on the satellite radio service piped into our office. There are no station breaks or DJs identifying the songs on the station the building owner has the music set to, so I type a few lines of lyrics as I remember them into Google. Most of the time I find a perfect match, and as soon as I get home, I'll usually buy the song from Amazon or Itunes.

Slapping self upside the head for being so stupid. Excuse me, assholes. If I can't easily and quickly identify the song I've just heard with a quick Google search, I'll forget all about it by the time I get home from work. I can't be the only consumer who pays for music this way - I like it, I identify it and then I buy it. So go ahead. Take down all the online lyric sites. As my dear departed father would have said "Go ahead. Be a guest. Cut off your face to spite your nose."

That's what the entire music industry needs - a Cuban-American daddy with an accent like Ricky Ricardo and a fast hand with a belt. Nobody beat any sense into these morons when they were kids, so they grew up to become music industry executives and whiny, entitled, foot-stomping ninnies. The world does not owe you a living.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 4:19pm
  
  Re:
  A google search for a song lyric ,, should lead to the website of the preforming Artist. Most bands have all their lyrics posted online at their own websites for just such reason.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Andrew F (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 5:00pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Not true. Many bands post on their websites, but they do poor search engine optimization. Third-party lyric sites do a much better job -- as they should since all they think about is how Google can find their lyrics first, whereas artists have to divide their attention between performing, recording, etc.
    
    Besides, most artists who aren't web-savvy probably paid some guy to put those lyrics online. Why pay someone when someone else is willing to do this for you for free?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 5:09pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      " Many bands post on their websites, but they do poor search engine optimization."
      
      True , so maybe you techies here can get jobs helping bands and songwriters with SEO,-- though with major labels and arists I do not fully ced your point .
      
      Bob Dylan for example has all his lyrics online and search "blowing in the wind lyrics" and #1 is : www.bobdylan.com/songs/blowin-wind
      
      So again you SEO tech types ,, DONATE your time to your favorite worthy unsung {pun intended ) band
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 5:12pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        being it is about songwriters here , I take the free adv. form techdirt:
        
        My music @ :
        
        http://www.myspace.com/radamhalperin
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Mr RC (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 3:12am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Hmm, did you pay the artists that you 'stole' from?
        
        "Usually I was playing my personal favorite covers from Neil Young, Dylan, Rolling Stones, the Grateful Dead honestly because that put the $$$ into the guitar case, though i do LOVE their songs , and tried to do the great songs by them that were not always their most popular."
        
        After all, you made money from their work.. they should get a cut... it's only right dont you think?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 8:24am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        "After all, you made money from their work.. they should get a cut... it's only right dont you think?"
        
        Thanks for reading my blog at Myspace,,,,, and Yes the songwriters did get paid!!! Before the internet , I bought the songbook,, and any bar I played in got an yearly visit from ASCAP et. al.,, to collect the royalties for the song the cover artists preform
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Andrew F (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 5:13pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        We do. And then the artists try to shut us our site.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 5:17pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        "We do. And then the artists try to shut us our site."
        
        can you re-type that ,, I miss the point , with the typo
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Andrew F (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 5:21pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Sorry -- meant: We do. And then the artists try to shut down our site.
        
        Meaning, the lyric sites that the industry is trying to shut down ARE, in a sense, free efforts by techy people to help artists.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 6:26pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        If the site makes some $$ ,, give the artist a cut .
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Phillip Vector (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 5:48pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Wait... Weren't you just complaining that people ask bands to play for free?
        
        Isn't that a bit hypocritical?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - PaulT (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 4:17am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        "though with major labels and arists I do not fully ced your point ."
        
        That's actually the point really. Major labels have good SEO and a comprehensive web presence. But, they also saturate the TV and radio with their music - you probably won't need to use Google to identify a major song because there's no way of getting past it. New, un-"commercial" and independent bands don't get that kind of exposure.
        
        Say you saw a band last night and they did a cover of a song you've never heard of before - you know it's a cover because you own all the band's albums and it's not on them. You can only remember a couple of lines from the chorus. You don't know who the original was by, and anyway the band in question have split up and don't have a current website, or don't have lyrics on there, or it's a Flash blob that can't be indexed by Google.
        
        How do you find the song? Maybe someone else at the gig knows, but you're at work and by the time you meet up with the guys afterwards you no longer remember or care. Congrats, the lack of lyrics sites have lost at least a sale, if not a new fan if you liked the song enough to check out the rest of their work.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 8:28am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        "Congrats, the lack of lyrics sites have lost at least a sale, if not a new fan if you liked the song enough to check out the rest of their work."
        
        Never said ban lyric sites,, just that any $$$ generated should be shared with the Lyricist. And again we are often taking about old classic songs ,, that while always in your head ,, may not be getting regular airplay anymore,, and my even be out of print -- with the recording industry cutbacks.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        PaulT (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 9:35am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        "And again we are often taking about old classic songs ,, that while always in your head ,, may not be getting regular airplay anymore"
        
        Who's "we"? YOU seem to be talking about old classics, others are referring to all music - including music that gets no major label support, may not be playing on any major radio station and won't be recognised if you ask people around you to help identify it.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 10:07am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        you want the lyrics, they have value ,, the website gets paid ,, so should the lyricist
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Phillip Vector (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 10:20am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        "you want the car, the car has value ,, the car dealer gets paid ,, so should the car maker"
        
        There.. Fixed that for you. Apparently, this is also what you believe.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        PaulT (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 10:36am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Yes, but I don't want the lyrics. I want the song. I will pay for the song, but I first have to find out what it's called and who recorded it. The lyrics site allows me to do this.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 11:54am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        "Yes, but I don't want the lyrics. I want the song. I will pay for the song, but I first have to find out what it's called and who recorded it. The lyrics site allows me to do this."
        
        Sometimes you have the song already ,--often because you got if for FREE online-- but now also want a copy of the lyric for your Karaoke club. So you go to a $$ -making website. That website should pay royalties to the lyricist
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        PaulT (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 1:01pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Here's the problem with your arguments - you're making a huge number of unsupported assumptions. The main ones are as follows:
        
        - That the majority of people using these sites are doing so for professional purposes.
        
        - That none of these professionals ever pay for the song (and therefore provide money to the lyricist) in other ways.
        
        - That the money raised by the lyrics site significantly outweighs the revenue raised through other means, either before or after the lyrics have been obtained.
        
        None of these are supported by and of the information you've supplied, which is mainly your skewed personal opinion. They are also extremely unlikely when weighed against the alternative.
        
        It is far more likely that the users of the sites are non-professionals in the music industry, be that musicians, venue owners or whatever. It is far more likely that they are people who would never pay a direct fee for lyrics - either due to not knowing the name of the song or simply that the lyrics have no direct monetary value outside of the recorded song.
        
        Once you realise this, it makes no sense to demand direct payments from the sites, when doing so will cause most of them to shut down and lose the revenue they indirectly provide. You only have to look at the history of internet radio and the inability for artists owed by SoundExchange to get paid to see where this would head. Not good for the listeners, the industry or the lyricists.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 2:26pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Your assumptions are just as unproveable as mine,
        
        Web Traffic , however is tangible. Money generated by the site is quantifiable,, ( I hope he pays taxes !).
        
        Just as radio sations and et al , pay royalties , so should profit making lyric sites.
        
        Broadcasters -- who do pay these royalties -- still have very good profit margins compared to other industries,, the websites w/ lyrics will not die, the royalties will be in in sync with with their traffic and adv. $$ .
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 May 2010 @ 4:27pm

Are they also going after all the "misheard" lyrics sights?

CCR: There's a bathroom on the right
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 11 May 2010 @ 4:01am
  
  Re:
  wouldn't that be sarcasm or parady, although unintentional, and therefore protected from copyright claims?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Andrew F (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 5:20pm

Sorry -- meant: We do. And then the artists try to shut down our site.

Meaning, the lyric sites that the industry is trying to shut down ARE, in a sense, free efforts by techy people to help artists.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 5:36pm
  
  Re:
  "Meaning, the lyric sites that the industry is trying to shut down ARE, in a sense, free efforts by techy people to help artists."
  
  The only help an artists needs is the $$ . If the lyric site is not generating $$ DIRECTLY to the composing Artist -- while the site itself gets Adv. $$$$ ---- THEN the Artist is being ripped off !!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 10 May 2010 @ 6:07pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Are you for real are just an example of poe's law at work?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Hephaestus (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 7:11am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      "poe's law"
      
      Thanks I needed a laugh
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Andrew F (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 6:14pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Nope.
    
    The lyric site lets the the visitor know what the song title was. Then the visitor, now knowing who the artist is, buys the song off iTunes, attends a concert, etc. That's money the artist wouldn't have made without the "free" help of the lyric sites.
    
    The fact that the lyric sites also make money off advertising is irrelevant. Most artists don't have any advertising on their own site -- so there's no competition.
    
    Think of it this way. Would the artist make more or less money in a world without these lyric sites? I say less. Yes, more people will buy lyric sheets now, but many more people would never learn you existed. They'd hear your lyric, have a hard time finding you online, and would never buy an album or go to a concert.
    
    Put another way -- the biggest problem an artist faces isn't that someone is ripping them off. It's that no one gives a crap about them.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 6:43pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      "Think of it this way. Would the artist make more or less money in a world without these lyric sites? I say less."
      
      I would not cede you that point.
      
      If the lyric site make $$$ , that Artists legally deserve a cut.
      
      If the lyric site is a volunteer labour of love,, that is nice. But there are very few nice people who do that.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Andrew F (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 7:19pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Legally maybe, but business-wise, I think it's the wrong decision. The artist is getting paid, indirectly, through increased album sales and concert tickets. You won't cede me that point, but you have no argument to counter it.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 7:50pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        songwriters and lyricist are often NOT the performing artist
        
        ,, the only income such songwriters and lyricist get is from "music publishing" and "air-play royalties" -- not concert tickets.
        
        Lyric sites that make $$$ -- owe $$$ to the craftsmen they make money from : the Lyricist.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Andrew F (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 8:59pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        So charge the performing artist a royalty for concert tickets (or anything that involves your lyrics). Problem solved.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 9:21pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        "So charge the performing artist a royalty for concert tickets (or anything that involves your lyrics). Problem solved."
        
        they do.
        
        Lyric sites don't
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Andrew F (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 9:49pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Okay, so lyric sites increase sales for performing artists. Since the lyricist gets a cut from the performing artist, then the lyricist makes money as well.
        
        If the lyric website is ultimately making the lyricist more money, then what's the problem? You're getting a cut. If that's not enough for you, negotiate with the performing artist.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 10:16pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ReOkay, so lyric sites increase sales for performing artists.
        "Okay, so lyric sites increase sales for performing artists."
        
        An unproved assumption. The Lyric site may be providing a valued service to many people who used song lyrics. Teachers in Schools, Corparate pep rallys, Street Musicians,,
        
        You are assumming here that people are going to lyric sites for new and popular songs, with active performing artist.
        
        I visit these lyric site to get the lyrics to old classics, Chuck Berry and Little Richard songs. I think the "....the King and Queen..."* deserve a few bucks for that.
        
        ( *I forget the full "American Pie" lyrics about Chuck and Rich,, so I look will look 'em up , and then send Don McClean a check for my printout of his copyrighted lyrics. Right!?!?)
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        PaulT (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 4:29am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        So, songwriters and lyricists don't get paid when more copies of the songs get sold? Because your response doesn't make sense if they do... If that's what you're saying , it sounds like they need a new agent, not to shut down lyrics sites...
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 12 May 2010 @ 5:02pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        ASCAP
        http://www.ascap.com/about/payment/index.html
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jason Cook, 10 May 2010 @ 5:41pm

Legal lyric sites
We run one legal lyric site that is not behind a paywall at http://lyrics.wikia.com
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 6:01pm
  
  Re: Legal lyric sites
  I read the "about" : "Part of the free culture movement, Wikia content is released under a license and operates on the Open Source MediaWiki software"
  
  Simple Question :
  
  Does this site generate $$$ for the site owners -- even if it be a non-profit corp with a paid staff? If it does not , then , i think an Artist would not mind.
  
  If there is a paid professional staff -- even if the corp is non-profit -- well then the Artists deserve a cut .
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Atkray (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 7:24pm
    
    Re: Re: Legal lyric sites
    I'll jump in here at the bottom with my personal take on these sites since it seems to have been hinted at but not directly addressed or elaborated on.
    
    The "lyrics sites" I visit are sites that have search-able indexes of lyrics by name of song and/or name of artist. There are a couple of ways I use these sites:
    
    I use them for when I am listing to a song I have placed on my hard drive and don't feel like going downstairs and digging through CD jewel boxes only to fond out there were no lyrics included or that my kids have lost them.
    
    I use them when I am listing to a radio station or Yahoo music/Launchcast online and I like a song by some artist and wish to understand the lyrics.
    
    Particularly for the latter searching to multiple artists web sites is an inconvenience and something I am not willing to do.
    
    Someone has gone to the trouble to find my need and fill it. They sell ads for ringtones and make some money for their effort, more power to them.
    
    For a songwriter to insist on a cut of the action is reprehensible. If this traffic is so important then they can set up their own site and pay all their fellow artists for posting the lyrics to demonstrate to others what a great business model it is.
    
    I personally went out and bought Metallica S&M on DVD because I heard it on Launchcast and really liked the lyrics to a couple of songs(this after hearing them for years on the radio and not being motivated in the least to own any of their music).
    
    For me personally and I would expect some others these sites directly result in sales for the artist with no cost or effort on their part. Back on my home planet we call that a WIN.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Technopolitical (profile), 12 May 2010 @ 5:08pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Legal lyric sites
      "digging through CD jewel boxes only to fond out there were no lyrics included"
      
      Remember in the lyric sleeve , under each song lyric; "Lyrics by permission of ... the Lyricist".
      
      The Artist and/or the record company paid the lyric writer for the both for the right to record the song AND to the right print the lyrics with the album.
      
      As well , the record company could choose to save $$ , and not print the lyrics at all --to avoid paying any roylties to the lyricist -- even if it is that recording artist's lyrics that is on that album.
      
      The Music Industry is not made up of all nice people.
      
      Look at for example Kris Kristofferson , who wrote "Me and Bobby McGee."
      
      How many Kris albums do you own? None I bet.
      
      But somewhere in you music library you you got at least one cover of "Bobby McGee". Maybe more.
      
      When Kris cut his own cover , of Bobby McGee,, which was much lower in selling than Janis Joplin's cover , good chance his record company would skimp , and not print the lyrics thus giving royalties to Kris.
      
      Because from the Record Company prospective it like giving Kris and now his fans -- the album's buyers --- Free $$$.
      
      If Kris's fans want the lyrics the record companies say "let them ( the fans) pay for it at the music store".
      
      There is always some trying to shortchange the songwriter.
      
      Today it is for-profit-lyric-websites.
      
      ( I am using Kris just as an example here of the many Songwriting Artist that would fit into this catagory.
      I do not claim any knowledge of the factual occurance that was between Kris and his record company at the time of Bobby Megee's finacial peak. It is just an academic example )
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Clueby4, 10 May 2010 @ 7:14pm

If Lyrics are not included = defective product
Sorry, troglopolicital.

The lyrics are part of the package. If not included with the music; embedded, insert, follow-up email, etc I would consider the product defective.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Technopolitical (profile), 12 May 2010 @ 7:38pm
  
  Re: If Lyrics are not included = defective product
  http://www.techdirt.com/article.php?sid=20100510/0404369357&threaded=true#c2338
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 May 2010 @ 7:24pm

Technopolitical here, and Mr. Israelite, mentioned in the NYT article are just flat out wrong-headed about lyrics.

Almost always, the reason people do a search for on-line lyrics is to help them figure out what song they've heard.

If you've got a song rolling around in your head, but can't come up with its name or the artist, you can't buy it, can you?

Do people sometimes download lyrics so they can read and re-read it like it was poetry, and treasure them for their own value? Yeah, I suppose that occasionally happens, but it's single digit percentage to be sure.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 10 May 2010 @ 8:32pm
  
  Re:
  Yeah, I suppose that occasionally happens, but it's single digit percentage to be sure.
  
  [citation needed]
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 8:46pm
  
  Re: If you've got a song rolling around in your head, but can't come up with its name or the artist, you can't buy it, can you?
  "If you've got a song rolling around in your head, but can't come up with its name or the artist, you can't buy it, can you?"
  
  In the old ays , you would call the radio station -- they actually like those calls , esp , those lonly late nite DJs.
  
  Today with most radio staions compleltly automated , you cannot really do that. So I ussually ask the girls working as cashiers at the supermarket ,, " you know that song, just playing over the loudspeakers ?" They always do.
  
  So then I go home , search google , and print out the lyrics for free, and record the song off of You Tube for free ,, then learn the song , and play it a bar, and make $$$ off the song.
  
  The orginal artist gets near -zero -- not total zero , as ASCAP does ask bars were bands play covers to cough up some dough each year.
  
  I feel guilty, so do I save $$$ to buy the album with the song in question--- Nope.
  
  But I did get those lyric for FREE , from a money making site. There is where the artist can take a cut. Thats why these sites with Lyrics---- that make $$$ -- owe the lyricist $$.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - PaulT (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 4:34am
    
    Re: Re: If you've got a song rolling around in your head, but can't come up with its name or the artist, you can't buy it, can you?
    "So I ussually ask the girls working as cashiers at the supermarket ,, " you know that song, just playing over the loudspeakers ?"
    
    ...and if the song you're interested in isn't currently being played? Has never been played in a supermarket?
    
    "record the song off of You Tube for free ,, then learn the song , and play it a bar, and make $$$ off the song. "
    
    That's your moral decision. Others would just buy a copy of the song. Hell, your moronic rantings here seem to assume that everybody downloading lyrics is a working artist, not a teenager who just wants to know what a song they heard last night was. That's one hell of a faulty strawman you have there!
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Technopolitical (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 8:36am
      
      Re: Re: Re: If you've got a song rolling around in your head, but can't come up with its name or the artist, you can't buy it, can you?
      I really does not matter why you want the lyric s ,, if you want them they have value. But I do stand by my argument ,, that many lyric seekers are doing so for professional reasons.
      
      Whatever reason one seeks a lyric ,, this was NEVER a free product before the internet-- you had to buy the songbook ( or maybe go to the libary , and make copies ( for a fee) there.
      
      I do not pay the radio staions for listening , the advertisers pay the radio station ,, who in turn pay the Artist.
      
      Lyric sites with adv, show pay the artist the same way.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - PaulT (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 9:11am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: If you've got a song rolling around in your head, but can't come up with its name or the artist, you can't buy it, can you?
        "But I do stand by my argument ,, that many lyric seekers are doing so for professional reasons."
        
        But, many do not. Just because that's why YOU use them, it's hardly the primary purpose for most people.
        
        "Whatever reason one seeks a lyric ,, this was NEVER a free product before the internet"
        
        Before the internet, my primary argument for lyric sites would not have existed. So, ignore that and let's deal with what we have today.
        
        To repeat: lyric sites are useful because they allow people to find song titles and artists by typing in the lyrics they can remember. Without these sites, there would only be one single source for the lyrics - the artist's own site - and if this is not correctly set up, you'll never find it in this way. So, the song doesn't get purchased and the artist LOSES money.
        
        I agree that if your intention is to use the lyrics to record a cover version then you should buy a copy. People have NEVER bought lyrics just to read when they listen to the record (they used to come free with the album), and even if you wanted to, you can hardly buy they lyrics for a song that you don't know the title of.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 12 May 2010 @ 5:28pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: If you've got a song rolling around in your head, but can't come up with its name or the artist, you can't buy it, can you?
        "lyric sites are useful because they allow people to find song titles and artists by typing in the lyrics they can remember"
        
        No, Your statment proves the POWER (and usefulness) of the LYRIC to help generate legal sales for the Recording Artist's benifit.
        
        Do it fair . Here the song . Can't get song out of your brain. So go the libary (old days) , OR go to Wiki-whatever (today) ,, using the lyric to find the song title of the song you want to buy.
        
        That well-crafted , can't leave your brain LYRIC , that you keep singing w/o even thinking- the "hook" as it is known in the music industry, that is now the catalyst for your song quest. ( And there is a good chance the Lyricist , IS NOT the recording artist.)
        
        Once you found out what song it is that you want to buy , because "I just can't get out of your head" ,, then please do buy the song legally -- so all involved in its production get their $$$.
        
        And then if you find you need the Lyrics too, for your Karaoke Club -- or your JOB as a Music Theripist -- buy the Lyrics in a legal fashion.
        
        One that gives the Lyricist a fair cut of $$ , as outlined @
        http://www.ascap.com/about/payment/paymentintro.html
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        PaulT (profile), 13 May 2010 @ 8:59am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: If you've got a song rolling around in your head, but can't come up with its name or the artist, you can't buy it, can you?
        Once again, while the lyric is the thing that I'm using to search, it's not the thing I value. You seem to be harking back to a mythical age where lyrics were poetry and the thing everyone loved about music. Have you listened to pop or rock music in the last 3 decades? Dylan is hardly the norm.
        
        You assume that the reason I have the lyric stuck in my head may well not have anything to do with the lyrics, but the music they're sung to. e.g. I can't stop humming the tune, but I can't remember anything other than "don't stop me nooow... dum dum dum dum dum dum" because the other lyrics are unmemorable.
        
        My solution: when I get a break from work, go to Goggle and search for "don't stop me now". I get a bunch of results that say "Queen". I click the Amazon link and click preview "yep, that's the tune. Oh look, the best of album's on sale, I might as well grab the whole thing". Artist and lyricist get paid - and the lyricist picks up cash for other tracks on the album if he also wrote them. I'm happy, the artists are happy and I get to listen to the music on the way home.
        
        Your solution: Lyric sites have mostly been shut down because copyright laws make them too difficult or expensive to run. If I can be bothered to make a special trip or I happen to be in the area (if I know where the store is), I go to a sheet music store. I'm not a good singer, so the guy says "well, I think it might be Queen but I'm not sure". He shows me the book, but none of the other words ring a bell. I don't read music, so that's no help. I decide to put the book down and leave. I watch Shaun of The Dead a few months later and go "oh yeah, so that's who that song's by", but I'm no longer that bothered about buying it.
        
        "And then if you find you need the Lyrics too, for your Karaoke Club -- or your JOB as a Music Theripist -- buy the Lyrics in a legal fashion. "
        
        Just out of curiosity, how many music therapists don't use the music? How many karaoke clubs don't have a copy of the music, usually on a specially purchased disc or file with the lyrics embedded (lyrics don't mean much if they're not in time with the music)? Your magical lyricist is already being paid, I'm just showing ways to increase revenue. Hiding the lyrics from the web, either directly or indirectly (by making lyric sites to expensive to run), isn't going to help.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        PaulT (profile), 13 May 2010 @ 9:39am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: If you've got a song rolling around in your head, but can't come up with its name or the artist, you can't buy it, can you?
        Heh, that sentence should have read "You assume that the reason I have the song stuck in my head is purely down to the lyrics, but it may well not have anything to do with them". Meaning was intact, I hope.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 13 May 2010 @ 10:44am
        
        IT clear you are writing just to write at this stage , and any further disscusion is useless.
        stated before you asked :
        
        Please point me to the site where I can do this. I don't think I've ever seen a site that *sells* lyrics alone"
        
        I replied :
        Those who sell the lyrics directly , they are called "music publishers" The ones that print the songbooks we USED to BUY , before free lyric ( and chord ) site , stole their biz.
        
        This biggest and best:
        Hal Leonard Online
        Welcome to Hal Leonard Online, the internet home for the world's largest music print publisher. For over 60 years, we've been publishing and distributing ...
        www.halleonard.com/ -
        
        http://www.techdirt.com/article.php?sid=20100510/0404369357#c2148
        
        IT clear you are writing just to write at this stage , and any further disscusion is useless.
        
        You do not understand how ASCAP & Music Publishing industry functions, and probably never will.
        
        It takes careful reading, you are too busy writing.
        
        I have summed up my posts on my blog for those who wish
        read them.
        http://technopoliticalscience.blogspot.com/2010/05/artists-do-not-work-for-free.html
        
        bye
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
DTS, 10 May 2010 @ 8:41pm

Lyrics as facts
Isn't there something that states facts can't be copyrighted? Why shouldn't we take accurate lyrics as factual, given that they're a replication of the words to a song? I don't think anyone would mind a policing and weeding out of blatantly incorrect sites that only want views, but why punish sites that accurately portray what the artist wanted by parroting what they sung?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 8:53pm
  
  Re: Lyrics as facts
  Lyrics are not Facts. They are human creations. Art. Art is coptrighted --it is in the U.S. Constitution.
  
  The issue here is :
  
  Do money making websites , that post lyrics of popular songs on that website , bringing people to their money making website ,,, owe any of that $$ to the lyricist who wrote the words,, that bring traffic to their website,,, that is making the website owner MONEY ??
  
  Be real folks . The Lyricist -- who often IS NOT the musical performer deserves some cut of the $$$$
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 10 May 2010 @ 10:45pm
    
    Re: Re: Lyrics as facts
    It's useful arts. In the American constitution, it's useful arts.
    
    Lyrics aren't useful.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 10 May 2010 @ 11:02pm
    
    Re: Re: Lyrics as facts
    They already got paid. Move along.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Andrew F (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 9:41pm
  
  Re: Lyrics as facts
  I'm pretty that wouldn't hold water in court. Otherwise, I could simply claim that copying an entire book does not violate copyright since it's simply stating, factually, which words were in the book. There's probably also derivative work liability.
  
  IANAL, but I think these lyric sites do infringe upon the copyright. The issue is whether there's any real damage done to the right-holder. Probably not. Lyric sites increase sales.
  
  And to address technopolitical's point (one more time), if the lyricist is distinct from the performing artist and not getting a decent cut, that's not really the fault of the lyrics site. It's up to the lyricist to negotiate a better deal from the performer.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - DTS, 10 May 2010 @ 11:05pm
    
    Re: Re: Lyrics as facts
    >I'm pretty that wouldn't hold water in court. Otherwise, I could simply claim that copying an entire book does not violate copyright since it's simply stating, factually, which words were in the book.
    
    True. On another hand, though, lyrics aren't the bulk of the song like words are the bulk of the book. Which is where I think technopolitical's argument about sheet music fails -- lyric sites don't provide note for note, stave for stave sheet music either.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Technopolitical (profile), 10 May 2010 @ 11:10pm
    
    Re: Re: Lyrics as facts
    "And to address technopolitical's point (one more time), if the lyricist is distinct from the performing artist and not getting a decent cut, that's not really the fault of the lyrics site. It's up to the lyricist to negotiate a better deal from the performer."
    
    These are standard deals concerning songwriters/ lyricist , with ASCAP and etc ,, and not really the point here,
    
    The point here :
    Once upon a time people went to the "sheet music store" and BOUGHT w/ money , the "words and/or music" to the song they needed. They where teachers , camp counselors ,, Corparate movitvators, and street and bar musicians , people who use these songs lyrics in their line of WORK.
    
    These same folks are now getting IT ALL for free --( saying this one more time )- FROM A $$$ making website with song lyrics.
    
    You need my song lyrics so bad , you used to pay for them , ( and then make illegal Xeroxes !!) Now you get them for free ALL THE WAY.
    
    yes for the big Artists ,, no really much impact ,, but for that now aging lyricist who scored only one or two hits,, way back when ,, the missing royalties could be the difference between housing and homelessness.
    
    A nasty assumption here is that only new and popular song lyrics are taken from these site. I would bet old classic are a very big share , and it is those aging lyrical artists , who most need the the protection for website that post thier lyrics.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Mr RC (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 3:20am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Lyrics as facts
      http://www.myspace.com/radamhalperin
      
      Hmm, did you pay the artists that you 'stole' from?
      
      "Usually I was playing my personal favorite covers from Neil Young, Dylan, Rolling Stones, the Grateful Dead honestly because that put the $$$ into the guitar case, though i do LOVE their songs , and tried to do the great songs by them that were not always their most popular."
      
      After all, you made money from their work.. they should get a cut... it's only right dont you think?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Technopolitical (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 8:40am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Lyrics as facts
        "After all, you made money from their work.. they should get a cut... it's only right dont you think?"
        
        I answered that above,, I bought the songbook ,, and the bar paid ASCAP for the cover tunes preformed in the bar. So everyone got their cut
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - JC, 11 May 2010 @ 6:19am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Lyrics as facts
      In reply to all of the crap you have written.
      
      1) Why do you feel that you deserve to get paid for song lyrics over and over again? I am a software engineer. Three years ago I changed jobs; however, the place I used to work is still making money off of the software I wrote, do you think I should still be getting paid?
      
      2) Why do you feel that you deserve money from the lyric sites? If you want "a cut of the money" create your own lyric site.
      
      3) Why in the hell do you keep talking about buying sheet music from a store? People used to do lots of things that they don't do anymore (outhouses anyone).
      
      4) "and it is those aging lyrical artists , who most need the the protection for website that post thier lyrics" NOW HEAR THIS, I am not responsible for your retirement. If you were paid $75,000 to write song lyrics and you spent it on hookers and blow ... that is your problem.
      
      More generally, I do not understand the attitude of those "artists" who believe that their work should provide a perpetual source of income. I have many friends who are artists and a majority of them agree, my job is much harder, much more demanding, and more stressful; however, at no point have I believed that the software I write today will be providing an income for me tomorrow.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 11 May 2010 @ 7:24am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Lyrics as facts
      Once upon a time people went to the "sheet music store" and BOUGHT w/ money , the "words and/or music" to the song
      
      Uh, no. Once upon a time, most of us read the lyrics off of the album insert.
      
      Now I buy my music from Amazon - downloaded. There is no album insert and no lyrics.
      You act as if most people using lyrics sites were street and bar performers.
      Get a clue Techno... Most of the people who buy the music aren't performers.
      At the end of the day, Average Joe is the guy whose paying most of your income (indirectly, through the Royalties you are paid).
      
      Also, you blasted right on past the argument that lyrics sites help find song titles which can then be purchased. You just jumped ahead and implied that the guy who searches for lyrics will then only proceed download music for free.
      Hello... iTunes and Amazon are making their millions from somewhere. Anything that helps their customers find songs they want to buy makes you money. What happened to your common sense?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Technopolitical (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 9:19pm
        
        "Uh, no. Once upon a time, most of us read the lyrics off of the album insert."
        Actually not true. Dylan ussually did not ( and does not now ) include his lyrics on his albums.
        
        The Beatles only did with Sgt. Pepper and the White Album ,, but not with Abby Road and Let it Be.
        
        I would guess ,that it might be, in many other cases where artists/ record company/ music publisher , DID NOT include the lyrics, a pure biz decision.
        
        Why spend extra $$ printing the lyrics into the album sleeve,, when NOT printing , will motivate those who want the Chords and/or lyrics to go to the music store and BUY them? Thus raising more $$ for the biz model.
        
        So buying the Album , has never guaranteed also getting the printed offical copyrighted lyrics for free.
        
        You want them. You had to buy them.
        
        So back to Mike's open words in the post : "Basically, lyrics -- which, by themselves, generated absolutely no money for songwriters/publishers for pretty much the entire history of the business."
        
        That is a false premise. Lyrics have NEVER been free.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 12 May 2010 @ 12:36pm
        
        You know the Recording Artist also has to get full permission to print lyrics with the album /CD/ tape/ website.
        Remember in the lyric sleeve , under each song lyric; "Lyrics by permission of ... the Lyricist".
        
        The Artist and/or the record company paid the lyric writer for the both for the right to record the song AND to the right print the lyrics with the album.
        
        As well , the record company could choose to save $$ , and not print the lyrics at all --to avoid paying any roylties to the lyricist -- even if it is that recording artist's lyrics that is on that album.
        
        The Music Industry is not made up of all nice people.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 12 May 2010 @ 1:06pm
        
        As well , the record company could choose to save $$ , and not print the lyrics at all --to avoid paying any roylties to the lyricist -- even if it is that recording artist's lyrics that is on that album.
        Look at for example Kris Kristofferson , who wrote "Me and Bobby McGee."
        
        How many Kris albums do you own? None I bet.
        
        But somewhere in you music library you you got at least one cover of "Bobby McGee". Maybe more.
        
        When Kris cut his own cover , of Bobby McGee,, which was much lower in selling than Janis Joplin's cover , good chance his record company would skimp , and not print the lyrics thus giving royalties to Kris.
        
        Because from the Record Company prospective it like giving Kris and now his fans -- the album's buyers --- Free $$$.
        
        If Kris's fans want the lyrics the record companies say "let them ( the fans) pay for it at the music store".
        
        There is always some trying to shortchange the songwriter.
        
        Today it is for-profit-lyric-websites.
        
        ( I am using Kris just as an example here of the many Songwriting Artist that would fit into this catagory.
        I do not claim any knowledge of the factual occurance that was between Kris and his record company at the time of Bobby Megee's finacial peak. It is just an academic example )
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 May 2010 @ 10:46pm

PAY ME!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
jilocasin (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 6:47am

Price/Value & copyright as the means to never having to work again....
While this is probably going to be as useful as discussing philosophy with a gold fish......

Value vs. Price:
Breathable air (w/Oxygen) - extremely valuable.
Breathable air (w/Oxygen) - priceless. As in I don't expect to pay for it.

Life itself = most valuable thing I can think of.
Life itself = $0.00 (unless you are talking to health insurance companies ;).

Copyright = promoting the creation of Art (plus other things not germane to this discussion).

It's supposed to be a trade of a _limited_ monopoly on copying for a _limited_ time to encourage people to produce more. The public looses the ability to make free use and copies for a short time in exchange for getting a richer public domain.

What people like Technopolitical are suggesting is that it's all about making money from what you had produced indefinitely. That's the _opposite_ of the purpose of copyright for those of you who have been paying attention.

Under Technopolitical's world view you create once and never have to create again as you should be able to keep collecting money from that one thing. The end result is _less_ works being produced. I guess that's what you get when people and corporations develop a sense of entitlement and a welfare mentality. Sad.... truly sad.

Personally I think the closest analogy to a lyricist or songwriter is architect. Just like the architect she is often the designer for the builders (performers) to create buildings (music). Just as some people can design and build their own house (singer/songwriter) they can be the same person. Often though they are paid to create blueprints (lyrics - melodies) for others to use.

Now if an architect does a really good job of designing a building (say the plans for a Wallyworld store) she doesn't get paid every time Wallyworld builds a new store using those plans. She gets paid according to the agreement she had with the people she created them for.

Even sillier would be the thought that if other people went to a web site and looked up how many stairs there are in a Wallyworld store (you know to settle a bet), or wanted to see how the bathrooms were laid out because they were building their own store and thought that was a particularly good idea they way they are laid out in Wallyworld stores. That the original architect should get a cut.

Unfortunately, people like Technopolitical seem to think that every time anyone references, makes a mention of, or thinks about lyrics that the songwriter/lyricist should get a cut. The recording industry talks about the "entitlement mentality" of people who share files... 'pot meet kettle'.

The lyricist did a job and got paid what he thought it was worth. If he didn't then he should have taken the job in the first place. The thought that someone else can make money off of your work doesn't entitle him to a cut in perpetuity. You want to get more money, then produce more. If your work is so popular then you should be able to demand a higher pay for your next piece of work, whether it's plans for a house or lyrics to a song.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Technopolitical (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 8:42am
  
  Re: Price/Value & copyright as the means to never having to work again....
  Radio stations pay the songwriters EVERY time the song gets plays.
  
  A lyric site should pay anytime a lyric page with advertising gets visited.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Technopolitical (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 8:49am

as far as Mike opening post ...
I read techdirt most daily , but ussually do not comment ,, but here I have no choice ,, Mike I found you opening post on this thread , to be shortsighted and dissmissive to the hard-working and talented songwriters and lyricists ,, who work is not so valuable and sought out by millions of folks. ( First time you have REALLY ticked me off in years Mike,,, but I know ,, that why you are here ,, and that is why I read you everday.)

In closing : If a song is not in the public domain, and I want the song lyrics-- for whatever reason -- that orginal composing artist deserves a cut from a money making lyric website. Why is that such a forgien idea to non-artists?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The Infamous Joe (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 10:08am
  
  Re: as far as Mike opening post ...
  Okay, I read through all your totally (Poe's Law, indeed!) bullshit, and I *really* want to know what planet you live on. Seriously.
  
  I'm not going to rehash all the perfectly sensible responses to your crap, but one thing seems to have been missed. Specifically, you have stated time and time again that in the old days you'd... (Which, by itself is complete retarded-- in the old days you used to pay for ice but I bet you don't feel a pang of regret for all the out of work ice sellers when you press the ice button on your fridge, do you? Of course not. ) You claim that in the "old days" if you wanted to know song lyrics you'd ask a store clerk/DJ/cashier. Well, now instead of asking those people, I ask Google. I fail to see the difference, and to fend off the insane reply, I'll show you why I think this way.
  
  Scenario 1: It is the old days. I hear a snippet of a song and want to know more. Go to the den and dial the local radio station (who doesn't pay for play) and ask if the DJ knows the title of the song with the lyrics I know. Maybe he does, and he tells me. Did anyone get paid yet? Assuming the DJ was on the clock, he did. So, the DJ should send a part of the money he made while answering my question to the artist in question? Of course not.
  
  Scenario 2: It is present fucking day. I hear a snippet of a song and want to know more. I pull out my phone and google the lyrics I know, and google returns a few results. Since someone conveniently created a web site with a searchable database of lyrics, I now know the name of the artist in question. Should the person who made $0.000002 on my page view send a cut of that to the artist? No, of course not.
  
  Furthermore, web sites, although cheap, are not free. Would you send a check to the site's owner if no one visited his site to help pay the money the lost hosting the lyrics? No, of course not. Why do you *deserve* to get paid for work no one asked you to do, but the guy to hosts your lyrics at a loss doesn't *deserve* to get paid for his unsolicited work?
  
  Stop being stupid, it gives all the other humans a very bad name.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Technopolitical (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 10:30am
    
    Re: Re: as far as Mike opening post ...
    "Should the person who made $0.000002 on my page view send a cut of that to the artist? No, of course not."
    
    Radio stations and other broacasters do pay the songwriter for each play ,, those little sums do ad up !! For an older songwriter , those few bucks , maybe even a few hundred bucks , do add up.
    
    The same as bars with cover band pay ASCAP et al , for the songs preformed there THEY PAY !!
    
    ,, so too should FOR-PROFIT lyric sites
    pay the orginal artist who is generating their website's income.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 May 2010 @ 10:48am

I'm so glad I don't buy music anymore.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Technopolitical (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 12:14pm

but now also want a copy of the lyric for your Karaoke club.
Sometimes you have the song already ,--often because you got if for FREE online-- but now also want a copy of the lyric for your Karaoke club. So you go to a $$ -making website. That website should pay royalties to the lyricist
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Technopolitical (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 4:53pm

"Basically, lyrics -- which, by themselves, generated absolutely no money for songwriters/publishers for pretty much the entire history of the business
Sorry Mike , I think my words here dis-prove that assumption.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Technopolitical (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 5:13pm

Because of online lyric sites, TV Rock made a sale that would not have occurred had those sites not existed.
I am not saying that does not happen on occassion , that a sale takes place , because of a lyric site .

BUt suppose , as it is often true that the Recording Artist -- maybe even Mr. Tv Rock -- IS NOT the lyricist of the song.

The LYRICs made the song FIND-ABLE.

Why not just search for "male R& B in the key of C" ????

Because the LYRICS -- and the talent of the LYRICIST is a large what made you look for the song..... AND the tool you used to find it.

Worth $$ for the composing lyric writer , easy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- PaulT (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 10:11pm
  
  Re: Because of online lyric sites, TV Rock made a sale that would not have occurred had those sites not existed.
  Wow, so many ridiculous assumptions in one post!
  
  "maybe even Mr. Tv Rock -- IS NOT the lyricist of the song."
  
  Google it for 30 secs, and you'll find out why this is a ridiculous statement. You're not even thinking in the same genre as I am (hint: "Axwell remix" usually doesn't indicate blues guitar).
  
  "The LYRICs made the song FIND-ABLE."
  
  Indeed. Which is why I was able to buy a copy and give everybody involved a cut of the profits. By demanding separate payment for the lyrics, sites would be shut down and this purchase not made. Very short-sighted.
  
  "Why not just search for "male R& B in the key of C""
  
  Because it's not an R&B song, and I'm not a musician so would have no idea what key it's in?
  
  Actually, I could also have searched for it using a description of the music video. Would the director of said video now deserve a cut of Google's revenue for making a memorable video?
  
  "Worth $$ for the composing lyric writer , easy."
  
  IF there was a lyricist (which I highly doubt), they got a cut of the royalties that came from my purchase.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Technopolitical (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 10:59pm
    
    professionals ,, using Song Lyrics a a tool of their trade.
    "Indeed. Which is why I was able to buy a copy and give everybody involved a cut of the profits. By demanding separate payment for the lyrics, sites would be shut down and this purchase not made. Very short-sighted"
    
    But much , maybe even most times , people ARE not looking to buy the song. They are people who may NEED the lyrics for a professional need. A school teacher ( I remember a class on "American Pie" in 8th grade English), Music Therapist , working with hospitalized children or Alzheimers patients-- (song lyrics work wonders in that profression), a corparate rally speaker , who brings the lyric to "we are the Champions" to ralley the sales force,, and etc.
    
    All professionals ,, using Song Lyrics a a tool of their trade.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - PaulT (profile), 12 May 2010 @ 3:57am
      
      Re: professionals ,, using Song Lyrics a a tool of their trade.
      "But much , maybe even most times , people ARE not looking to buy the song. They are people who may NEED the lyrics for a professional need."
      
      You see, this is the problem. You make this assumption and base your entire argument on it, but have nothing to back it up.
      
      Fair enough, I don't have any particular citations either but which is really more likely? That these sites are being visited by people trying to search for songs (or settle an argument about what a singer is actually singing about, or downloading them to their media player)? Or that the majority of users consists of literally hundreds of thousands of professionals who are making money from the lyrics?
      
      To my mind, the latter sounds rather silly, and I maintain that if that if the former is true then shutting down lyric sites (either as an intended or unintended consequence) will *harm* songwriters and musicians in the long term. That's a typical tactic for the music industry, unfortunately. Perhaps you're correct in your assumption, but it doesn't sound likely and it does seem that the RIAA has gone straight to sue mode rather trying to work out if any money is being lost rather than gained.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Technopolitical (profile), 12 May 2010 @ 4:53am
        
        Re: Re: professionals ,, using Song Lyrics a a tool of their trade.
        "You see, this is the problem. You make this assumption and base your entire argument on it, but have nothing to back it up."
        
        Where are you? I just gave three solid concrete examples of professions that use song lyrics as part of that profession:
        
        Again here we go :
        I quote mysself -- "They are people who may NEED the lyrics for a professional need.
        
        A school teacher ( I remember a class on "American Pie" in 8th grade English),
        
        Music Therapist , working with hospitalized children or Alzheimers patients-- (song lyrics work wonders in that profression),
        
        A corparate rally speaker , who brings the lyric to "we are the Champions" to ralley the sales force,, and etc.
        
        All professionals ,, using Song Lyrics a a tool of their trade."
        
        Not to mention a Broadway show revivial, the local musical playhouse in any small town , School plays, Bar Bands , Street Musicans , and etc. ALL "use and need" countless "lyric-sheets" printed on pieces of paper.
        
        Before the internet , music publishing was a major revenue source for songwriters and/or lyricists.
        
        If you wanted the lyrics -- for whatever reason -- you PAID for them, and often it was a biz expense , that you could write off on you taxes -- because you used the lyrics in your line of work.
        
        Today , on the internet , all these FOR_PROFIT lyric websites , are making money , "stealing" lyrics !!!
        
        Clear now ?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        The Infamous Joe (profile), 12 May 2010 @ 5:37am
        
        Re: Re: Re: professionals ,, using Song Lyrics a a tool of their trade.
        I don't think I understand what you mean by "for profit" or "profit directly from lyrics" and I'm hoping when you explain it, it will make you look less like a greedy bastard.
        
        Are you suggesting that (A) there are sites out there that require you to *buy* the lyrics and they aren't paying the proper fee or (B) are you suggesting that a site who throws up a few adds to cover the cost of hosting and domain fees as well as web design should pay you a cut of the ad money?
        
        If (A), I can find a way to agree with you. That *would* be "direct profit" from lyrics. If you mean (B), then you don't understand the definition of "directly" and are, in fact, just a greedy bastard. (in my opinion, of course!) Go get a damn job.
        
        If you wanted the lyrics -- for whatever reason -- you PAID for them, and often it was a biz expense , that you could write off on you taxes -- because you used the lyrics in your line of work.
        
        You aren't making sense. If I wanted the lyrics (before the internet?) I would just ask people, and eventually *someone* would know. I have never *once* paid for lyrics to a song. Ever. I can't imagine that is uncommon.
        
        Also, If a *fan* wants the lyrics and has to pay for them, he can't write them off on his taxes, because his business is not being a fan. Stop being retarded, please. Furthermore, if I were a musician and wanted lyrics to a song you wrote, then it would mostly likely be so I can cover that song. You *do* get paid when I cover that song. You are seriously suggesting that you should get paid both when I learn your song *and* when I perform it? That, my friend, is a textbook example of entitlement and greed. Come back down from your lofty perch, O great muse, and toil in the mud and dirt with us lowly mortals.
        
        And get off my goddamn lawn.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 12 May 2010 @ 7:24am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: professionals ,, using Song Lyrics a a tool of their trade.
        "You aren't making sense. If I wanted the lyrics (before the internet?) I would just ask people, and eventually *someone* would know. I have never *once* paid for lyrics to a song. Ever. I can't imagine that is uncommon"
        
        Again , there are professional people , who , professionally use lyrics -- see above posts.
        
        These for-profit lyric websites ,, allow people who professionally use lyrics in thier line of WORK , to now get those lytics with out paying the proper license fees.
        
        All I am saying is those for profit lyric websites should pay license fees from their advertising $$ --- just as with the users of music ,, on or in : "radio, TV, cable, bars, clubs, restaurants, shopping malls, concert halls and promoters, web sites, airlines, orchestras, etc." ( to quote from ASCAP.
        
        IF you can not understand that . Go away. Post elsewhere for your kicks
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Technopolitical (profile), 12 May 2010 @ 8:05am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: professionals ,, using Song Lyrics a a tool of their trade.
        Clearer :
        
        "All I am saying is those for profit lyric websites should pay license fees from THE INCOME fromtheir advertising $$ --- just as with the users of music ,, on or in 00 "radio, TV, cable, bars, clubs, restaurants, shopping malls, concert halls and promoters, web sites, airlines, orchestras, etc."
        ( to quote from ASCAP.)"
        
        I rest my case
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Technopolitical (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 11:13pm
    
    and I'm not a musician so would have no idea what key it's in?
    Exactly . You need the Lyrics to find the song.
    
    I was exploring a hyperthetical premise , not the specifics of Mr. TV --
    
    The point: many recording Artist , ARE NOT the Song Writers -- (and untill Chuck Berry , and then the Beatles , they rarely were.)
    
    Song and Lyric Writing is a distinct and separate craft from music preformance and music production.
    
    Quality , memorable , and sale-able Lyric Writing is a highly unique talent , that is VERY rare to find.
    
    That old Scotish Drinking Song , was just another drunken dirge-- until Francies Scott Key turned it into the "Star Bangled Banner" , whith his well crafted and inspired lyrics.
    
    Lyricist are artists. when there art is consumed -- for whatever reason , whether as part of a package ( the recording) ,, or as a stand alone ( on those lyric sites ) , thet deserve payment.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Technopolitical (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 5:46pm

"I am not saying that does not happen on occassion , that a sale takes place , because of a lyric site "
But I am saying the lyric site will still get the lion's share of the $$--- as a reward for THEIR hard work an investment. Kudos to the Lyric site Webmasters who create JOBS.

But the Lyricist -- who is at, the Root , the Core , and the PURPOSE of that $$ making LYRIC Website ,, that talented person who wrote the LYRICS to " Stormy Weather ", surely deserves some "spare change",, esp when you see some of the "Stormy Weather" song lyrics ,, right there , on the front pages of all the major news sites,--- and NOW YOU want the full copy of the LYRICS -- for whatever reason you do.

Why? The SONG's LYRICs have VALUE to you !!

Pay the Lyricist through the advertising on the Lyric site , just like broadcasters of songs in other mediums do.

http://www.google.com/search?q=stormy%20weather%20lyrics&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbo=u& amp;tbs=nws:1&source=og&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wn
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Technopolitical (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 6:08pm

AND To the guy above with the computer apps that can,, he claims,, write -- memorable & marketable lyrics
"I walk around, heavy-hearted and sad
Night comes around and I'm still feeling bad
Rain's pouring down, blinding every hope I had
This pitterin pattering, beating and spattering drives Me Mad
Love, Love, Love, this misery's just too much for me

Can't go on, everything I have is gone
Stormy weather since my man and I ain't together
It's raining all the time, keeps raining all the time"

AND To the guy above with the computer apps that can,, he claims,, write -- memorable & marketable lyrics ---

well sir , your...

"pitterin pattering, beating and spattering drives Me Mad" !!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 11 May 2010 @ 7:02pm
  
  Re: AND To the guy above with the computer apps that can,, he claims,, write -- memorable & marketable lyrics
  Have you made sure the lyricist whom you've quoted got paid for your professional usage?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Technopolitical (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 7:48pm
    
    Actually here it fair use
    http://www.songwritershalloffame.org/exhibits/C92
    
    " Lyricist Ted Koehler was born in Washington, D.C. on July 14, 1894.
    In his collaborations with some of the greatest Tin Pan Alley composers, most notably Harold Arlen, Koehler produced such memorable standards as “Stormy Weather”.............."
    
    http://www.songwritershalloffame.org/exhibits/C92
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Technopolitical (profile), 11 May 2010 @ 7:57pm

Songwriters Hall of Fame
About the Songwriters Hall of Fame

Songwriters Hall of Fame’s ongoing mission is to celebrate and honor the contributions of our great popular music songwriters who have written the soundtrack for our nation’s history, while developing new writing talent through workshops, showcases, scholarships and digital initiatives.

© 2002-2010 The Songwriters Hall of Fame

http://www.songwritershalloffame.org/about/1001
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Technopolitical (profile), 12 May 2010 @ 5:14am

HOW YOU GET PAID AT ASCAP
http://www.ascap.com/about/payment/index.html

"About ASCAP

HOW YOU GET PAID AT ASCAP
ASCAP receives payment for public performances of songs and compositions by negotiating license fees with the users of music (radio, TV, cable, bars, clubs, restaurants, shopping malls, concert halls and promoters, web sites, airlines, orchestras, etc.) and distributing these monies to members whose works were performed.

ASCAP pays directly and fairly. ASCAP is guided by a "follow the dollar" principle in the design of its payment system. In other words, the money collected from television stations is paid out to members for performances of their works on television; the money collected from radio stations is paid out for radio performances, and so on. ASCAP tracks music use on these and other media and live venues to determine which music has been performed, and the appropriate writers and publishers to be paid.

The value of each performance is determined by several factors, among them the amount of license fees collected in a medium (television, cable, radio, etc.), the type of performance (visual vocal, background music, theme song, jingle, etc.) and the economic significance of the licensee (how much a station pays us).

There are billions of performances licensed by ASCAP each year. ASCAP is committed to paying our members for these performances fairly, accurately and efficiently. ASCAP collects and distributes more money in performance royalty income than any other organization and our payment system is by far the fairest and most objective in the U.S.

Because ASCAP is owned and governed by its members, we have a strong commitment to maximizing payments to members. In most situations, you will find that ASCAP pays more than our competitors over the life of a copyright.

We hope this information will help you to understand the overall design of the ASCAP payment system and the many factors that go into calculating how much a particular performance is worth, as it explains the steps from performance to royalty check."

http://www.ascap.com/about/payment/index.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]