21–30 of 83 posts
Hi, OP here. Happy to answer any specific question...
Where did the initial seeding of all the lyrics & bands come from? Also, are most of the new lyrics contributed by users and if so how do you handle authenticating that the lyrics provided are accurate?
But matter of fact is that Directlyrics hosts only around 10k. A decision made early on to focus on less pages compared to competitors that needed to rank 1M+ paghes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why does https://www.directlyrics.com have a TITLE of "Azlyrics" and an H1 of "Azlyrics" but http://www.azlyrics.com seems to be an entirely unrelated web site? The latter is typically what I end up at when I search for song lyrics if I click one of the first few links (though if I want to read some amusing analysis, usually there is a Genius.com link a few below).
Yes, good eye. A great example of continuious testing SEO opportunities. What if Google would start ranking directlyrics on specific 'azlyrics' queries? I haven't seen it happen yet, but if it worked... expect it to be reverted next week.
And as I was reading this I was humming Springsteen to myself
"Glory days, well, they'll pass you by
Glory days, in the wink of a young girl's eye
Glory days, glory days"
Turns out directlyrics doesn't have those lyrics. Google however returned them at top of the search homepage.
And... wow!
TIL there is a version of this great song with a verse that was not included in the original 80s version.
"My old man worked twenty years on the line
And they let him go
Now everywhere he goes out looking for work
They just tell him that he's too old"
Here's the video: https://youtu.be/P5-IoEcolp8
Glory days!
I feel like starting a business with a massive theft of other people's intellectual property isn't a great model to follow.
Hi, OP here. Happy to answer any specific question...
The transition from unlicensed to licensed seems like a big step. Did the publishers just reach out and ask you to pay a fee?
So back in 2010 the first law suit started against lyrics sites: > http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/californ... It was pretty clear that others would be next. Hence unlicensed wouldn't be maintainable. Next to that, I wanted to sell advertising to big brands. My advertising partner insisted we needed to be licensed for the Coca Cola's of this world to spend money on my traffic. So for me it was an…
Did publishers just reach out to say "hey, pay this fee"? Or did they straight up start with lawsuits/C&D? Or did you reach out to them and say "hey I got this site, how much do I pay you to become licensed?"
I feel like starting a business with a massive theft of other people's intellectual property isn't a great model to follow.
Serious question: is this theft of IP? I know if a songwriter writes a song, you need to license it in order to perform it for profit, but are the actual lyrics intellectual property?
Typically, the latter is pursued by recording companies, because that is the IP they own or exclusively license. The rest is rarely handled by the individual rights-holders, as they usually just let ASCAP or a similar organization handle the business and litigation end, and just cash the royalty checks.
Licensing the lyrics should be a whole lot cheaper than the music or a specific recording. So it would not cost a lyrics site as much to be fully legit as it would for a music streaming site. Likewise, it may cost less to license a cover band to perform something than to license the recording made of it by a famous group, if the song was not actually written by them. This is why ABC's Dancing With the Stars uses so many covers, but obviously still uses recognizable recordings where Disney already has or can cheaply obtain a performance license.
I feel like starting a business with a massive theft of other people's intellectual property isn't a great model to follow.
Well back in 2004 there was no way to get an actual license. Most lyrics sites claimed to be safe under DMCA or "Educational Use". Only up until the publishers stood up for themselves, the industry shifted slowly.
There's also no way to hang the original Mona Lisa in your house but that doesn't mean you get to steal it.
I feel like starting a business with a massive theft of other people's intellectual property isn't a great model to follow.
For example, Crunchyroll is the least terrible anime streaming site and they got started by stealing anime that was "stolen" by folks that wanted to put decent subtitles on shows from Japan.
They eventually hired some of the folks they were stealing subtitles from, and got licensing deals from the content owners once they had revenue. But they never would have been able to negotiate a deal if they'd have asked for permission instead of forgiveness.
It's entirely possible to imagine that another streaming company (Netflix, Hulu) would have looked at all of the great quality subtitles being produced by non-content owners and figured out that there was revenue to be had. But I fail to see how they would have seen the demand if people hadn't been stealing and making good subtitles to begin with, and producing huge numbers of stolen downloads/streams.
That's a lot of content to get licensed. You have to individually negotiate with every band and artist to get the license for their lyrics?
Tracking down loose artists on your own initiative just to give them enough money that they won't track you down and sue you seems like an overly honorable use of time and money to coexist with a successful business.