Wikiquote talk:Votes for deletion/Songs From Family Guy

"Give Up The Toad Now from Let's Go to the Hop [2.14]" section contains the entire song? I am not sure if it goes as fair use quote. --Aphaia 18:08, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Written transcripts, in whole or in part, require fair-use licensing? I know that it's a copyright violation to record the actual video and/or audio, in whole or in part, but since when are transcriptions not okay? Also, I think that this all qualifies as fair use anyhow, since its being used solely for educational purposes with zero monetary gain or potential therefor.

Of course it has the entire song, IT'S A SONG LYRIC PAGE!!! I created this page so there was a place I could get to quickly so I could have find all the songs with all their lyrics. Thank you.--BrianGriffin-FG 15:03, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Let's keep responses friendly and professional.
 * This is clearly an unnecessary page and should be redirected as proposed.--Cato 21:55, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

I added a few more songs, a song page with just "Give Up the Toad" didn't seem practical75.2.37.75 14:30, 5 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I am not a lawyer, but this is my understanding of the legal situation. The lyrics of a song are a creative work whose composer receives an automatic copyright upon its creation. They are the only person who has the right to wave this copyright or license the material. The hundreds of lyrics websites on the web are, in all likelihood, blatant copyright violators, however useful their material is to fans and for educational purposes. (The "educational purposes" clause of copyrighting does not give any outside party free license to provide entire transcriptions to the world without restrictions, as unlimited-access websites do.) Lyrics websites may get away with this for three possible reasons I can think of:
 * Some may have license agreements with the copyright holders.
 * Many copyright holders find this no-effort advertising of the lyrical content of their performances to be advantageous.
 * Most copyright holders don't believe the cost of suing any particular website is worth the protection of the lyrical content of the songs.
 * None of these can be taken as permission to violate copyrights. As is being demonstrated every week in the press nowadays, the third item is becoming the tipping point for many suits. If the copyvio organization is sufficiently well-funded (e.g., Google or YouTube), and the violations frequent enough (e.g., 30,000 copyvios of JASRAC-owned material alone), the lawyers descend.
 * The Wikimedia Foundation, owners of the overall copyright to this and other wiki projects, is visible enough on the Web to be made an example of if we allow this kind of copyright violation to go unchecked. This is even more important for Wikiquote than other projects, because much of our primary material, quotes, comes from currently copyrighted works. For this reason and others, we focus on small quantities of pithy excerpts from works, to provide a limited selection of excellent material. We cannot serve as an archive of entire works, even song lyrics. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 20:26, 5 August 2007 (UTC)