Leadsinger, Inc. v. BMG Music Publishing
filed January 2, 2007 Ninth Circuit,
Cite as 06-55102

Karaoke Maker Asked To Pay License For Use Of Copyrighted Materials

The issue stemmed from a petition by music publisher BMG Music publishing to have Leadsinger, Inc., a manufacturer of karaoke devices, secure the following requirements in order to use it for its karaoke machines:

• compulsory mechanical licenses’ for the use of copyrighted musical compositions


• pay a fee for the reprint of lyrics


• pay the synchronization fee to display lyrics in real-time coordination with song recordings

In response, Leadinger filed for declaratory judgment of its right to visually display song lyrics in real time with song recordings without more than the compulsory licenses it already possessed.

However, in dismissing the complaint, the trial court concluded:

• that a compulsory license did not grant Leadsinger the right to display visual images and lyrics in real time with music


• that Leadsinger’s complaint did not support its fair use claim, dismissing the complaint without leave.

As a result, Leadsinger made an appeal on the judgment.

In reviewing the case, the Ninth Circuit court of appeals affirmed the ruling based on the following reasons:

• because Leadsinger’s use of the copyrighted lyrics was commercial and the likelihood of market harm was presumed(under federal Copyright Act)., Leadsinger was not entitled to declaratory judgment under the fair use doctrine.


• noting that the application of copyright law to karaoke devices was a matter of first impression in the circuit, the court found that Leadsinger’s device was an audiovisual work ‘using a series of related images intrinsically intended to be shown by the use of machines’


• in addition to any compulsory licenses necessary to make and distribute phono records, Leadsinger was also required to secure synchronization licenses to display images of song lyrics in timed relation with recorded music.

Further, the court also believed that Leadsinger’s complaint supported only its commercial use of song lyrics, and that its unlicensed commercial use of BMG’s copyrighted material was therefore an unfair exploitation of BMG’s monopoly privilege.

In addition, based on the complaint, the appeals court song also held that:

• the lyrics are works of creative expression, as opposed to informational work, and it could be reasonably inferred from Leadsinger’s complaint that it used copyrighted lyrics in their entirety


• the complaint did not analyze the effect that sale of Leadsinger’s device would have on the market.

Thus, since the purpose and character of Leadsinger’s use was commercial, song lyrics fell within the core of copyright protection, and Leadsinger used song lyrics in their entirety, it was not entitled to declaratory judgment based on fair use.

The court of appeals therefore affirmed a judgment of the district court which held:

• that a karaoke device was within the definition of protected audiovisuals works


• and its manufacturer therefore needed to have a synchronization license from the copyright holder, as well as a compulsory mechanical license, to print or display song lyrics in real time with song recordings.

In ruling, the appeals court held that the district court did not err in dismissing plaintiff's (Leadsinger, Inc.) request for a declaration that it was entitled to print or display song lyrics in real time with song recordings under Sec. 107's fair use doctrine where purpose and character of plaintiff's use was commercial, song lyrics fall within core of copyright protection, and plaintiff used song lyrics in their entirety.