It wouldn't be appropriate to go into specifics, but I can add more information. It wasn't about lyrics. Thats where Genius started. They moved into allowing a

It wouldn't be appropriate to go into specifics, but I can add more information. It wasn't about lyrics. Thats where Genius started. They moved into allowing annotation for news sites. This presented copyright issues (which I wasn't complaining about in my original comment) where they would reproduce the story and images on a new domain. This presented problems as many publishers have contracts with writers, illustrators, and photographers where they need to pay them more if their content appears on other websites - or simply not allowed to have this hosted anywhere else. Genius ignored those issues and the simple copyright aspects. The other concern was that, as a publisher, if you had an article that wasn't liked by a powerful interest group (business, religion, cult, lobby, etc.), they could perform coordinated efforts to annotate and contradict every fact - those that were fact-checked and run past legal - to undermine reports. This isn't about how the public get to flag 'fake news', this is how interest groups can undermine legitimate stories. Genius were not willing to address this, or put basic safeguards in place to address this at any meaningful level - let alone giving us an option to 'opt-out'. And by the way, this was not 'hypothetical'. In my role I had seen how this happened in numerous forms and this was a bigger attack vector. I hope that helps provide the necessary context.