News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Universal Music Sues Grooveshark for 100,000 Illegal Uploads. Parent comment

Re:Universal Music Sues Grooveshark for 100,000 Illegal Uploads by betterth on Tuesday November 22, 2011 @03:17PM (#3267145)
One wonders how Spotify is succeeding where Grooveshark is failing.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Universal Music Sues Grooveshark for 100,000 Illegal Uploads by adamcw on Tuesday November 22, 2011 @03:51PM (#3267295)
Grooveshark did this without inking the necessary deals. If I understand correctly, their library is provided by their users uploading.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Universal Music Sues Grooveshark for 100,000 Illegal Uploads by cookiecaper on Tuesday November 22, 2011 @03:56PM (#3267318)
Right, Grooveshark's entire business model is centered around DMCA protections. Only "user-generated content" affords a DMCA safe harbor defense, so all the copyrighted music they host has to be uploaded by individual users who each assert that they have the rights to distribute the song.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Universal Music Sues Grooveshark for 100,000 Illegal Uploads by jessriedel on Tuesday November 22, 2011 @05:19PM (#3267667)
Why can't the labels just send mass DMCA takedown letters? Are users really uploading songs faster than they can be taken down?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Universal Music Sues Grooveshark for 100,000 Illegal Uploads by ethank on Tuesday November 22, 2011 @05:58PM (#3267829)
They have and the tracks pop back up*

*According to the leaked emails.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Universal Music Sues Grooveshark for 100,000 Illegal Uploads by jessriedel on Tuesday November 22, 2011 @07:12PM (#3268078)
Do you have a link to the full story? DevX101's link doesn't say anything about DMCA takedown notices.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Universal Music Sues Grooveshark for 100,000 Illegal Uploads by ethank on Tuesday November 22, 2011 @03:19PM (#3267151)
They have legal agreements (deals) and equity incentive for the labels.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Universal Music Sues Grooveshark for 100,000 Illegal Uploads by v21 on Tuesday November 22, 2011 @07:52PM (#3268194)
I think one reason they've been luckier legally is that they sold a fair fraction of the company to record labels for a pittance early on.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Universal Music Sues Grooveshark for 100,000 Illegal Uploads by bookwormAT on Saturday November 26, 2011 @05:59PM (#3280968)
Spotify is opt-in while Grooveshark is opt-out.

Both Spotify and Grooveshark pay royalties to labels that they have a license agreement with. But if you don't want your stuff on a streaming service, users will upload it to Grooveshark anyway.

This is also the reason why there is so much cool stuff on Grooveshark that is not on Spotify. Forgotten albums, bootlegs, remixes and mainstream music from certain bands. Grooveshark will also never show you a "this song is not available in your region" message.

[ Parent | on HN ]