feddit.org

0 points

5 months ago

There is no legal precedent requiring these services.

There is legal precedent for requiring captioning where I’m from and probably in the US as well. Practically every form of broadcasted video (and at least here, it is required of websites with video) has a legal requirement to provide captions. I don’t see how it would be difficult to apply that to music.

It being available on the free tier has almost no relevance to Spotify being a profit making entity that has to comply with the law. I’d be surprised if they don’t get in trouble for it legally. As pointed out elsewhere it’s paywalling an accessibility feature. Which seems like a great way to draw enough eyeballs to your bullshit and get legislation changes; assuming it doesn’t already violate it.

report

SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world

[ - ]

-1 points

4 months ago

I’ve never seen closed captioning for music in shows, it’s literally just music signs. So obviously they aren’t the same and you’re talking out of your ass like the other user……

So what precedent? Your precedent that you are claiming, shows that it’s okay to not CC music lyrics…. Jeeez shot your own fucking foot with this silly pout didn’t you…?

report

[ - ]

0 points

4 months ago

Jeeez shot your own fucking foot with this silly pout didn’t you…?

Honestly, this caught me so off guard it made me laugh. Not even the guy I was disagreeing with came at like that?? The point was caption/transcription/lyrics are essentially synonymous, all are transcribing some other medium to text for the point of being read. So my point that there is precedent (CC on television being required legally) still stands.

It does shit me that older programs they could/can just put the treble clef symbol for music as you mentioned though.

report

SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world

[ - ]

-1 points

4 months ago

It does shit me that older programs they could/can just put the treble clef symbol for music as you mentioned though.

Old…? That’s the point dude, they still do it since there is no requirement (even in fucking tv) to cc music. Wow…. Music has NEVER EVER FUCKING BEEN CLOSED CAPTIONED.

Lmfao.

There is zero precedent and your point is just wrong, your example they don’t even CC the music in it… so how is it precedent for it on radio. Fucking yeesh. Your example actually proves there is absolutely zero precedent on anything for music closed captioning…. Hence shooting your fucking foot with your own point… can you comprehend that now? Or does it need to be explained even more simply for you……?

report

[ - ]

0 points

4 months ago

Songs are captioned in TV though and I see them include lyrics (when no characters are speaking) or a song title. As the other poster mentioned though it is exemption to current law. Which is beside the point. I’ve also never claimed music was captioned. That is the point of this discussion currently. Try to keep up. Also no need for caps mate, take a deep breath.

Either you don’t understand what the word precedence means or (more likely) you’re deliberately missing the point so you can do what your post history is full of. Which start arguments with people and try your level best to demean them. There has been 0 reason for your tone or behaviour during joining this discussion.

Seriously, the way you speak to people is gross. If your idea of recreation is having a go at people online then it pretty apparent that you’re probably not doing too well with life.

report

SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world

[ - ]

-2 points

4 months ago

Songs are captioned in TV though and I see them include lyrics (when no characters are speaking) or a song title.

I’ve never heard of that, or have I seen that in ANY media I’ve watched, got a source?

Either you don’t understand what the word precedence means or (more likely) you’re deliberately missing the point so you can do what your post history is full of.

Uhh… what…? Clearly you don’t, precedence means that it sets the bar for all others, (please provide whatever you’re using for a definition so maybe this can be cleared up and you can maybe show you aren’t a troll and actually meant to have a conversation) if nothing closed captions songs… how can that be precedence for it? If anything it’s precedence that nothing needs to do it, since anything with CC doesn’t do songs… again hence the shooting yourself in the foot with your point… but it’s not surprising you would need this explained again.

It’s funny, I didn’t go through your post history, since it isn’t relevant to the conversation at hand, but there’s multiple things wrong with this yeesh. A, you also have comments that come out that way, it’s literally a personal perspective/opinion…. Fucking yikes if you need this pointed out…. and B it’s fallacious and is done to attack someone’s character instead of the points at hand.

Why do you people always resort to stuff like this when backed into a corner…? You clearly have zero understanding of the topic, and talking about something completely irrelevant like it is, is only detrimental to any ACTUAL conversations happening. Common troll tactic, again, fucking yeesh lol.

report

[ - ]

1 point

4 months ago

It was done for parts of a Fray song in scrubs I believe and there are other examples I’m sure. Given it isn’t a requirement and we’ve both acknowledged isn’t done I’m not going to bother fetching a “source”.

Uhh… you don’t, precedence means that it sets the bar for all others, if nothing closed captions songs… how can that be precedence for it?

That isn’t quite what legal precedence is but close enough, I’ll leave you to research that in your own time. I mentioned requiring CC for TV legally as the precedence for requiring songs or music be “captioned” or have lyrics provided. I don’t understand how you aren’t following this. Hence my assumption of you tripping over yourself to look for an argument.

It’s funny, I didn’t go through your post history, since it isn’t relevant to the conversation at hand

Given I didn’t enter a relatively neutral toned thread with petulant, personal insults; I’m not surprised. You did, so I got curious. Generally when people enter a discussion like that you draw conclusions about them as a poster. I also find these types also very much don’t like people looking post histories. A complete coincidence I’m sure.

is, is only detrimental to any ACTUAL conversations happening. Common troll tactic, again, fucking yeesh lol

Actually hilarious given how you entered this discussion and your history full of hurling insults at people over nothing or a perceived moral high ground. Get a better hobby or change your life so you don’t feel the need to try, poorly, putting people down online.

report