Genius uses absolutely ingenious method to catch Google stealing copyrighted lyrics.

[DetlefK]

Genius is a company that produces transcripts of songs and displays them on their website.

They found out that for some songs Google displays EXACTLY the same (100% identical characters and punctutation) transcript without attributing the work to Genius.

They laid out a trap to Google by hiding a Morse-code in the lyrics, using curved and straight apostrophes, proving that these lyrics had indeed been typed by Genius.

When confronted for the first time, Google said they were looking into it.

Genius confronted Google several times and always got the answer "we're looking into it".

Genius kept testing and found that Google was displaying the lyrics of 116 songs without attributing the work to Genius.

Google finally came clear that they were getting the lyrics from Lyricfind.

Genius sent a cease-and-desist to Lyricfind to stop them from stealing their transcripts.

The stealing continued and Google continued displaying the stolen content.

The Wall Street Journal wrote an article about this.

When confronted by WSJ journalists, the Lyricfind CEO blamed some underlings and said "we're looking into it".

In response to the WSJ article, Google changed its display-page... by attributing Genius' lyrics to Lyricfind.

Google also removed transcripts that had the Genius apostrophe Morse-Code in them.

So, Genius designed a SECOND Morse-code, based on a "space" and an obscure Unicode-character that looks like a "space" to the bare eye. This second Morse-Code was then used on new songs.

Using this "space" Morse-Code, Genius proved that 40% of all lyrics-results for these new songs displayed by Google were STILL being lifted from Genius, DESPITE the cease-and-desist and DESPITE the public promises from Google and from Lyricfind that they would stop stealing Genius' content.

AND by cross-referencing, Genius proved that Google was ACTIVELY removing the apostrophe Morse-Code watermark Genius had inserted into its lyrics. Google was not removing the "space" Morse-Code watermark because they didn't know that it existed.

Google responded by saying that they have done nothing wrong and that it's the fault of their partners.





Genius is now suing Google and Lyricfind, because they are using Genius' content while keeping internet-users away from Genius' website, which is causing Genius financial harm.

Genius is suing Lyricfind for $50 million + attorney-costs.
Genius is suing Google to stop stealing their stuff.

[BuffaloJackalope]

1. 5/18/18: Google Removes 'Don't Be Evil' Clause From Its Code of Conduct

https://gizmodo.com/google-removes-nearly-all-mentions-of-dont-be-evil-from-1826153393

[Merlot]

7. google never promised to "don't be evil", they were admonishing us

I always found the "don't be evil" motto creepy.

[nuxvomica]

2. So Google is technically incompetent

That's got to burn more than them just being dishonest.

[usaf-vet]

3. Google found their own Article II?

[ramen]

4. Of all the ways to save a couple minutes of work..

think about all the work it has taken to fight this off. Ridiculous

[NoMoreRepugs]

5. Giant Corporations operating in an anything goes environment

are going to push the boundaries of what they can get away with to never dreamed of heights. tRUMP and his horde of incompetent minions have opened an entire new universe for plundering.

[cbdo2007]

6. If these song lyrics are under copywrite, aren't they both stealing from the artist??

This would be like me retyping a book like The DaVinci Code on a website for people to access for free.

[Merlot]

8. You can already access that book in the library for free.

You're not google and could not prevent others from reaching the real copy of the book, and instead direct them to your copy.

[Crabby Appleton]

9. No

Genius licenses the works they use and pays royalties to the copywriter owners.

[SCantiGOP]

10. Have you ever been to Holiday, SC?

Years ago I looked at one of the State Highway Dept maps and noticed a good size town next to Charleston called Holiday. I looked at the population chart and showed that it had an improbable population of exactly 10,000 people. I knew the area well enough to know that there was no such town.
I mentioned it to a guy in our office who provided mapping for the other departments, and he said that was a longstanding practice by map companies. There had never been a town named Holiday, but if you tried to sell a map with that town on it, it was obvious proof that you had stolen the copyrighted image of the map.