So it goes without saying that you're not one of those people who has committed the monstrous act of singing Happy Birthday without paying to license the performance rights?

Or have you perhaps also lead a less than pure life (as viewed by the RIAA)?

> So it goes without saying that you're not one of those people who has committed the monstrous act of singing Happy Birthday without paying to license the performance rights?

But, none of the copyright claims on that were valid so, how is that a monstrous act, even in an absolutist view of adherence to legal copyrights?

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-happy-birthday-s...

This is great to see! After 80 years a key piece of shared culture is finally free. I hadn't realized this news.

It is kinda insane that it took until 2015, though. I still somehow doubt that people who get on a high horse about lyrics sites and IP waited until someone with deep pockets was able to fend off a lawsuit in 2015 to sing the song, though.

Yes, I have sung Happy Birthday but I don't remember starting a business making money off of it and then bragging.

Yes, I have downloaded music in the past but I knew it was wrong and never used mental gymnastics to justify it. I simply did it because I didn't want to pay. Haven't done it in about a decade though.

IMO it takes greater mental gymnastics to justify the current copyright laws which extend far past the life of the author than it does to justify a lyrics site. The current law is almost exactly what Jefferson was worried about when writing about US copyright in its initial form—it locks up vast swaths of modern culture and even that of nearly a century ago.

It's absolutely crucial to understand that law and "right" from an ethical standpoint are not necessarily the same, though that is the ideal state to strive for.