Apple in talks to bring lyrics to iTunes
A proposed deal between Apple and digital media company Gracenote could soon see the iPod maker serve up song lyrics through its ubiquitous iTunes Store.
The move would be part of a larger industry-backed push to stifle proliferation of unauthorized websites that currently dominate the market, often offering inaccurate lyrics and never compensating artists for their work.
Gracenote and Yahoo! kicked-off the effort earlier this week in announcing a licensing deal allowing Yahoo! Music to offer legal, licensed song lyrics from hundreds of thousands of songs to its customers. Some feature artists include U2, Elvis and The Beatles.
In a deal with music publishers last summer, Gracenote gain the rights to distribute lyrics from nearly 100 music publishers, including the top five: BMG Music Publishing, EMI Music Publishing, Sony/ATV Music Publishing, Universal Music Publishing Group, Warner/Chappell Music, and dozens of prominent independent publishers.
“Song lyrics are continually among the top 10 searches performed on major search engines, though the results often provide consumers a frustrating experience filled with inconsistent and incomplete lyrics, and annoying pop-ups,” said Craig Palmer, president and chief executive officer of Gracenote.
In speaking to Reuters, Palmer revealed his firm is in discussions with various other music partners, such as Apple's iTunes. "We wouldn't be in the business to launch just one service, so stay tuned," he said.
The arrival of lyrics on iTunes could present exciting opportunities for Apple, which already offers high-quality album artwork downloads to its customers. A deal between Gracenote and Apple would almost certainly pave the way for lyric downloads to digital music players, allowing iPod users to sing along to their favorite tunes. Karaoke products and possibilities also exist.
In speaking to Reuters, Palmer said licensing lyrics should boost worldwide music publishing revenues, estimated at about $4 billion annually, by as much as $100 million annually within the next 10 years.
The move would be part of a larger industry-backed push to stifle proliferation of unauthorized websites that currently dominate the market, often offering inaccurate lyrics and never compensating artists for their work.
Gracenote and Yahoo! kicked-off the effort earlier this week in announcing a licensing deal allowing Yahoo! Music to offer legal, licensed song lyrics from hundreds of thousands of songs to its customers. Some feature artists include U2, Elvis and The Beatles.
In a deal with music publishers last summer, Gracenote gain the rights to distribute lyrics from nearly 100 music publishers, including the top five: BMG Music Publishing, EMI Music Publishing, Sony/ATV Music Publishing, Universal Music Publishing Group, Warner/Chappell Music, and dozens of prominent independent publishers.
“Song lyrics are continually among the top 10 searches performed on major search engines, though the results often provide consumers a frustrating experience filled with inconsistent and incomplete lyrics, and annoying pop-ups,” said Craig Palmer, president and chief executive officer of Gracenote.
In speaking to Reuters, Palmer revealed his firm is in discussions with various other music partners, such as Apple's iTunes. "We wouldn't be in the business to launch just one service, so stay tuned," he said.
The arrival of lyrics on iTunes could present exciting opportunities for Apple, which already offers high-quality album artwork downloads to its customers. A deal between Gracenote and Apple would almost certainly pave the way for lyric downloads to digital music players, allowing iPod users to sing along to their favorite tunes. Karaoke products and possibilities also exist.
In speaking to Reuters, Palmer said licensing lyrics should boost worldwide music publishing revenues, estimated at about $4 billion annually, by as much as $100 million annually within the next 10 years.
Comments
Now watch as Microsoft suddenly think of this too!
Oh dear god. What else will my commute on the tube have to endure?
People hanging upside down...
PS: When are we going to see subtitles for video content? Quicktime is apparently adding this feature in Leopard so I'm expecting this option to be included fot eh hearing impaired.
What a gigantic load of CRAP. To this day I don't understand what the big deal is about posting lyrics. It's TEXT. You can't restrict TEXT.
mmm... if you had penned a number one hit's lyrics after years of struggling as a writer, you might feel a little differently
Oh dear god. What else will my commute on the tube have to endure?
Now watch as Microsoft suddenly think of this too!
...or Yahoo...
...or Yahoo...
Perhaps you didn't read the article............
Gracenote and Yahoo! kicked-off the effort earlier this week in announcing a licensing deal allowing Yahoo! Music to offer legal, licensed song lyrics from hundreds of thousands of songs to its customers. Some feature artists include U2, Elvis and The Beatles.
-Clive
Perhaps you didn't read the article............
Well... actually... This is odd. The news cycle seems to have just as short a memory as kids these days. This was already alluded to weeks ago.... Apple partnering with Gracenote to release song lyrics, yadda yadda.
When the Yahoo thing was announced, everyone acted like they hadn't heard Apple was working on this already. Now it reads like Apple is "me too" to Yahoo... although honestly, just because Apple was reported first probably means next to nothing. I see that happening a lot. I believe there were two separate instances where the iPhone remote control patent flitted through the blogs too. It's unnerving.
But what's more important is complete, searchable liner notes and credits. My biggest sense of loss in switching from CD to iPod/iTunes it the inability to know who's playing on each track.
I totally agree. Even most artists websites don't include this info, which is a shame. I'm one of those crazy people who buys albums because I like the drummer on track 6, or the bass player on track 5.
Talk about paying for art and giving credit where credit is due. Can you imagine the outrage in Hollywood if a movie ran with no credits? Why should music be any different?
Oh dear god. What else will my commute on the tube have to endure?
Oh, come now... Karoke would be an AWESOME idea...
...
...
...
for sweet 16 birthday parties...
-Clive
http://www.gracenote.com/music/corpo...ate=2006120601
I'm thinking I must have been looking at the rampant speculation from people that can't seem to report stories that are speculative as such:
http://digg.com/apple/iTunes_to_get_...ly_It_s_coming
Meh.
Well... actually... This is odd. The news cycle seems to have just as short a memory as kids these days. This was already alluded to weeks ago.... Apple partnering with Gracenote to release song lyrics, yadda yadda.
If it wasn't posted on AI or MacRumors, I probably didn't read it.
But I was able to remember reading "yahoo" long enough to be surprised at LordJohnWhorfin's post...
-Clive
mmm... if you had penned a number one hit's lyrics after years of struggling as a writer, you might feel a little differently
Why? It would be one thing if these sites were selling the lyrics for profits or claiming that they were theirs, but to just post lyrics. If someone wants a song's lyrics, they can just listen to the song enough times to get them all. Until I read this article, I didn't even consider the concept that it was illegal to post lyrics.
Regardless, Gracenote as the gatekeeper to "legal" lyrics scares me. Their database for albums is riddled with inaccurate garbage, so can it really be expected that their lyrics will be any better? As an example, back in the Napster days, I downloaded a song called "Ponytail Girl" that claimed to be by Depeche Mode. I went to the Gracenote website and looked the song and sure enough it was listed as being off a version of the "Exciter" album. Problem is the song is by a one-man band called Color Theory, not Depeche Mode, not even an unreleased DM song. It was however on a DM tribute album by Color Theory (and the song can be freely downloaded from Amazon.com). Or perhaps less esoterically, all the songs and albums iTunes has gotten wrong when it pulled the information from the Gracenote DB. According to Gracenote, both discs of Rush's Chronicles 2-CD set are the same. Or the Scorpions' song "Stone in My Shoe" which Gracenote tagged as the nonsensical "Stone in My Show." I'm more trusting of a random website for accurate lyrics then Gracenote.
I'm one of those crazy people who buys albums because I like the drummer on track 6, or the bass player on track 5.
Well, imagine being able to create an automated playlist of, say, tracks with "Larry Carlton on guitar". Gives you a playlist with a cross-section of artist ranging Joni Mitchell to Steely Dan.
And good point about recording industry (who's SOOOOO concerned about artist' rights) ignoring album credits.
What a gigantic load of CRAP. To this day I don't understand what the big deal is about posting lyrics. It's TEXT. You can't restrict TEXT.
I know the angle that "Artists are starving because of the lyrics being posted online" is totally absurd.
Why? It would be one thing if these sites were selling the lyrics for profits or claiming that they were theirs, but to just post lyrics. If someone wants a song's lyrics, they can just listen to the song enough times to get them all. Until I read this article, I didn't even consider the concept that it was illegal to post lyrics.
Regardless, Gracenote as the gatekeeper to "legal" lyrics scares me. Their database for albums is riddled with inaccurate garbage, so can it really be expected that their lyrics will be any better? As an example, back in the Napster days, I downloaded a song called "Ponytail Girl" that claimed to be by Depeche Mode. I went to the Gracenote website and looked the song and sure enough it was listed as being off a version of the "Exciter" album. Problem is the song is by a one-man band called Color Theory, not Depeche Mode, not even an unreleased DM song. It was however on a DM tribute album by Color Theory (and the song can be freely downloaded from Amazon.com). Or perhaps less esoterically, all the songs and albums iTunes has gotten wrong when it pulled the information from the Gracenote DB. According to Gracenote, both discs of Rush's Chronicles 2-CD set are the same. Or the Scorpions' song "Stone in My Shoe" which Gracenote tagged as the nonsensical "Stone in My Show." I'm more trusting of a random website for accurate lyrics then Gracenote.
Yes I'm not in support of anyone gaining any copyright protection for lyrics so long as the person delivering the lyrics is not profiting from them. Thus if I wrote a song and my lyrics ended up on someones page and after perusing that page I notice a lot of advertising and pop-ups I would then have a case because my content is fueling their profitability from advertising. This way lyric sites would have to deliver them sans annoying adverstising or be shut down. That protects the artist and protects consumers.
mmm... if you had penned a number one hit's lyrics after years of struggling as a writer, you might feel a little differently
As long as people aren't selling your lyrics they aren't damaging your livelyhood. However there "is" a moneytrail with some of these sites that should be looked at.
I totally agree. Even most artists websites don't include this info, which is a shame. I'm one of those crazy people who buys albums because I like the drummer on track 6, or the bass player on track 5.
Talk about paying for art and giving credit where credit is due. Can you imagine the outrage in Hollywood if a movie ran with no credits? Why should music be any different?
For the albums that come with Digital Booklets that information is included most of the time. Of course, I rarely find one with a booklet, and they're not searchable either unless you go through and put that info in the song. That's what I did, I put the song info (players, etc) in the comments field. It was one of the PDF booklets, so it was just copy and paste.