Filed under: Features, Apple, App Store, App Review
App Store Stories: One man's app. Three corporations. Lyrics 2 against the world.
When Joris Kluivers (@kluivers on Twitter) set out to write his Lyrics app for iPhone, he never intended to personally take on Apple, Sony, and Gracenote. Kluivers, a student at the Vrije Universiteit in Amsterdam, was just trying to get his foot in the App Store door, not go toe-to-toe with three media behemoths. The story of how he ended up navigating through the corporate bulwarks to eventually successfully publish his latest release, Lyrics 2 (iTunes Link), with the blessings of all three companies, no less, makes quite the App Store saga.
Kluivers built the application around the LyricsWiki database. Featuring over 700,000 songs, the wiki provided easy access to a much-desired resource. It was exactly that access to a vast library of songs that caused the first of Kluiver's corporate challenges. Apple insisted on censoring his lyrics.
Read on to learn more about what happened...
As you're probably well aware, Apple carefully guards its App Store offerings. So long as Kluivers provided explicit lyrics, allowing access to songs by big-name artists like Eminem & 50 Cent [NSFW lyrics here], Apple would not approve the application. This, of course, dated back to the era before age-specific ratings were introduced to App Store.
So Kluivers complied, filtering out all explicit lyrics, and Apple gave Lyrics the green light. The application went live and users finally had access to the app. It wasn't long before those users started complaining. Many songs from artists who used non family friendly words weren't available-- just as Apple had requested.
The Easter Egg
To respond to his users, Kluivers built in an option to disable the filter, allowing full access to the wiki's lyrics data. Apple rejected the update. The profanity filter had to stay in place. After consideration, Kluivers tried to balance the user requests with Apple's demands. He moved the filter option into an Easter egg, allowing the application to disable the filter but hiding that ability from the App Store reviewers. He started letting unhappy customers know about the existence of the secret workaround.
Word about the Easter egg spread. Eventually one user mentioned it in their App Store review. Wired picked up the story, interviewing Jelle Prins of Moop.me, the cooperative that helped build the application. Prins told Wired that "it would be technically possible for Apple to discover a hidden Easter egg, but it would require intense inspection." There's a much easier way for Apple to discover Easter eggs, though: reading about them on Wired. Which they did.
Apple's developer wrangler called Kluivers, to ask him to pull his application from App Store until he could resubmit it without the filter workaround. The call came about 5 minutes too late. Kluivers had already pulled the app. But his move to do so had nothing to do with Apple reviewers or Easter eggs. It was because of Sony.
Enter Sony
Sony is a rights holder for many of the lyrics that were being used in the Lyrics application. Unknown to Kluivers, the LyricsWiki site he used was infringing Sony's copyright. His application, in turn, was using unlicensed content. Kluivers' agreement with Apple held him liable for that infingement.
The notice instructed Kluivers had to pull his app within 3 days; in actuality, he pulled his app within minutes. Kluivers was in New York City at the time of receiving that take down notice. He replied to Sony by e-mail and... was invited to discuss matters in person with a Sony licensing manager. He agreed.
Kluivers recalls, "We met in the Sony headquarters in New York City and all they could start with was, 'You guys have a big problem.'" Things went better from there. "It turned out he was a nice guy, just protecting his assets." Corporations are very protective of their copyrights. When Kluivers asked how he could legally license the lyrics, the Sony manager put him in touch with Gracenote.
Gracenote is the company when it comes to licensing music lyrics. Search online for 'Gracenote Lyrics Licensing' and you'll find story after story about deals with major companies like Radio Disney and Yahoo. An undergraduate student, Kluivers was anything but a big company, and his meeting with Gracenote bore that out. He was in no position to come up with the minimum six figures or so that Gracenote would need to provide lyrics licensing. For the moment, the Lyrics app was singing the blues.
Bringing Lyrics Back To Life
Mobile music is, in fact, a big deal. That fact is becoming more and more apparent to big companies like Gracenote. So, after a few months when Gracenote got back in touch with him, Kluivers was shocked to learn that they'd be willing to work on a basis that even a small-time developer could afford.
"At first I thought there was no deal. But they called me and said they wanted to renegotiate and thought they could offer me a better deal I might be able to afford otherwise." Realizing they were missing out on App Store opportunities, Gracenote and Kluivers managed to hammer out a deal to change the pricing model to something more realistic for small businesses. Without going into details, Kluivers said, "I was able to afford it, even as a small developer."
Kluivers had a family friend, a corporate lawyer, look through the contract before signing. Within a few months of inking his name, he had rewritten the application from scratch, and submitted it to the App Store. Lyrics 2 [iTunes link] went live in the App Store this week, taking advantage of the new Gracenote licensing and offering unfiltered access to those lyrics using Apple's new age classification of 12+.
Lyrics 2
I had a chance to test Lyrics 2 this week. Although it is still early days, the application provides instant access to the currently playing song's lyrics. The Gracenote database is not perfect -- it failed spectacularly on my search for the lyrics to the Broadway Show "The Drowsy Chaperone" -- but performed very well for most popular songs.
The US$2.99 application still has room to grow. In fact, I dumped quite a lot of feature requests on Kluivers when I chatted with him in preparation for this story. But what it does give you is excellent: proper lyrics for songs, and the comfort of knowing the rights holders are receiving their due. Simply designed and to the point, Lyrics 2 is well worth trying out, especially for those of us who like to karaoke while listening to our iPods.
It has been a long journey from the ill-fated Lyrics with its censoring issues, Easter eggs, and unlicensed data to the fully licensed Lyrics 2. Hopefully, Kluivers' story will provide an inspiration for the other small developers out there.
When I asked him if he had any specific advice for other small developers, he told me, "When you're negotiating with a big party, show them you are good at what you do." He advises bringing along sales numbers and emphasizing good design. It worked for him.

![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)


Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Jesper Kamstrup Linnet said 8:25AM on 10-28-2009
Unfortunately, this app is not available in the Danish app store. I guess it is related to licensing issues :-(
Reply
Robert said 11:01AM on 10-28-2009
try TuneWiki, it is much better and anywhere.
JJ said 8:45AM on 10-28-2009
ugh. I guess I should have looked more into how complete Gracenote's database is before I boguht the app on the basis of the "most popular songs" comment... apparently, no matter which Nine Inch Nails song I look up, I get the lyrics for "The Way Out Is Through".
Reply
Aaron said 9:02AM on 10-28-2009
Great article! Well written, good story, well researched...enlightening. Thanks Erica. Glad to see persistence and working with the system (as frustrating as that is) work for this dev. I used Lyrics (1) before it was pulled and I'll try Lyrics 2 today!
Reply
joshuakern said 9:08AM on 10-28-2009
Not available in Canada either...
Reply
duke said 10:03AM on 10-28-2009
These are the articles that we want Erica! You got the scoop, were thorough in your reporting, and wrote so eloquently. It was so much better than other articles you've submitted lately, and reminds me of the good ol' jailbreaking hayday articles. Good work and please keep up this level of quality! I'd rather see a couple well written articles from you over the course of a week than a bunch of quantity.
Reply
Blaktornado said 10:28AM on 10-28-2009
Stupid 1Password...
Anyway, what I was GOING to say, is that this is a very touching story and I'm glad it worked out well for the developer.
Reply
Rick Maddy said 10:41AM on 10-28-2009
Can someone please explain why an expensive licensing agreement is required just to display song lyrics. Nothing is being copied, nothing is being stolen. How can it be a copyright violation to display something that can be heard? How does it hurt anyone (other than greed)? This is like someone saying you can't post a photo of a work of art from a museum on a website without paying someone to do so.
Reply
SIP said 11:04AM on 10-28-2009
I would imagine that it has something to do with performing rights...
Heard the story of the lady who sang whilst stacking shelves? Got a letter from the UK version of the RIAA or whatever, threatening to sue her for singing "their" songs. They realised they were being stupid, so apologised.
Mike said 11:09AM on 10-28-2009
Because of the definition of copyright: "the exclusive legal right, given to an originator or an assignee to print, publish, perform, film, or record literary, artistic, or musical material, and to authorize others to do the same." You youngins may believe that it infringes on your right to have everything you want whenever you want, but thems the rules.
Rick Maddy said 11:17AM on 10-28-2009
@Mike. I'm far from a "youngin". I have no pirated software, I have no songs I didn't purchase. I have no unwarranted sense of entitlement to things. I just honestly don't understand how displaying song lyrics is hurting anyone. Why would a song writer care if someone could see, in text, the words of a song that can be listened to? Seems to me it's like free advertising for them.
I understand that it would be wrong to make use of those lyrics by copying them or using a portion of them in a new song or something similar. But simply displaying them for people to read should be fine. It doesn't cut into sales of the song in anyway.
Mike said 11:35AM on 10-28-2009
Sorry Rick, nothing personal. I work in IT at a medium-sized liberal arts college and our cease & desist letters from the RIAA to students have skyrocketed this year.
Personally, I've never understood why the copyright holders would have a problem with fans being able to finally figure out what the actual words to a particular song. I agree that the benefits greatly outweigh any possible "losses", however improbable. But until I'm made Grand Poobah and Benevolent Dictator for Life, that's the way it is (apologies to Walter Cronkite).
Michael Kaplan said 2:53PM on 10-28-2009
Actually, you CAN'T publish photos of a work of art in a museum without permission. Museums protect their artwork as vigorously as Disney protects Mickey Mouse.
(Which is ironic, of course, as Disney built its fortunes creating animated versions of public domain stories, for which they didn't have to pay the rights.)
Robert said 10:54AM on 10-28-2009
Why use this application that does not have all the lyrics, has legal issues when you can get TuneWiki which is signficantly better, has licenses from all the labels, can be laoded in any appstore, and you can play your iTunes music right from the application without the need to switch.
It is also the one that has synced lyrics, so you can see the lyrics when played and do not have to look for the right line.
Reply
cydeweyz said 11:29AM on 10-28-2009
Another vote for TuneWiki. Still, a great article though.
Reply
John said 11:57AM on 10-28-2009
This app wasn't the first lyrics app available...I've had LyricFind (which is also licensed, right from the start) since April, way ahead of when you say Lyrics came out.
The app is way better, too - way more content and other stuff besides just lyrics. Plus, it's free (with ads) - way better than paying $3 and not getting any Nine Inch Nails!
Reply
Athtart said 12:39PM on 10-28-2009
TuneWiki rules. It existed long before Lyrics as a Jailbroken app and was great then too. While it was certainly a good article it would have benefited by at least a mention of the other options available for lyrics.
Reply
Thomas said 1:04PM on 10-28-2009
I search on several data bases to get the lyrics for music I imported from CD into iTunes. All I wanted was to know exactly what the lyrics said since sometimes the music is too loud to hear the lyrics. It's so annoying that sites that are helping to promote music get shut down or in legal trouble. apparently the music labels don't really want people to understand the lyrics.
Reply
JAQ said 6:05PM on 10-28-2009
I'm baffled that the programmer had no idea that song lyrics were subject to copyright laws. Are people really that profoundly ignorant? Reading some of the comments here, I guess some of them are.
Reply
Janna said 10:57AM on 11-04-2009
We were interested to read this story. We have a sheet music app, MonaMusic, that has been approved by Apple and is up on the iTunes store. MonaMusic consists of an initial purchase that comes with two pieces of music with additional ones available for download (InApp purchases). Our sheet music includes titles by Led Zeppelin (approved by Zeppelin) and other classic rock greats. But getting the subsequent InApp Purchases approved by Apple has proven to be a frustrating and lengthy process. Even though our initial app has been approved, the subsequent products sit in the Apple Developer site with the words "in review" next to them. This has been going on for more than six weeks, even though Apple says it approves apps within 10-14 days. Despite numerous communications, we keep getting the same stock answer email responses. We are curious as to whether other developers have experienced the same type of delay and what, if any, action they have taken to remedy the problem.
Personally, I think Apple should do away entirely with the review process and simply post their rules of submission. If any apps violate those rules, then they are subject to removal with flagrant violators subject to banishment. This would make Apple into more of a policing agent rather than a censor which would dramatically cut down on Apple's time spent enforcing and make developers delighted. Apple is getting bad press on this censoring.
Reply