But I also see that many people here do not crunch through it even though I would expect contrary - we should see here more people who after a little thinking would see form of such behaviour as a threat to their (future) business.
In the end it is a feature, that will stop abuse of some lyrics websites[1] and make you be able to find lyrics you care about faster.
Now a problem with this is that it gives Google more control over information we are presented with as they prioritize resources in their steadily expanding domain. In the long run I do not know whether this will be better for the users, but meanwhile immediate quality[2] of search results will definitely improve.
[0] Especially 10 years ago when "user friendly" and "Linux" had no business appearing in the same sentence. There was much work done in that area since then, and now there are distros with much more focus on layman usability.
[1] Shady SEO is very easy due to how repetitive lyrics is, it makes for perfect keywords. So you either need manual intervention to moderate the search results[1.1], or extensive tweaks to the search engine algorithm just for this niche, which is a hack. I rather think this feature is an elegant solution to that problem. Not quite same as prioritizing youtube helped reduce number of people going to shady sites to download songs, but in the same solution space.
[1.1] Which is widely done for some of the other terms such as "credit" and "loan".
[2] In the future Google could potentially censor some of the results which will lead to the decreased quality of search.
s/search/windows
I'm almost certain MSFT's counsel used a very similar argument to you in the case! But eveningcoffee's point still stands - better user experience or not, it's still arguably anticompetitive behavior. Perhaps Google's counting on the lyrics aggregators not having licenses to the lyrics, and therefore not wanting to go to the courts?