Re:Grooveshark Shuts Down
by WettowelReactor on Thursday April 30, 2015 @09:57PM
(#9468937)
>> Doesn't it make sense to open source code when you know the product is dying?
That can depend on how much of the code base is their own. If they integrated any licensed components then they may not have the resources necessary to clean it up for release.
They own zero percent of the codebase. According to the link all IP was turned over to the winners of the court case.
Re:Grooveshark Shuts Down
by sebastianavina on Thursday April 30, 2015 @10:15PM
(#9469001)
I used grooveshark, but now streamer extension on chrome is a better option. youtube has all the music anyway
can you provide a link please? The search for "streamer" on chrome extensions results in many products.
Not the person you asked, but possibly this (googled "streamer chrome" directly): https://streamus.com/
They had to hand over all their IP as part of the settlement so I doubt the product will be open sourced.
Such contrast in fortunes when you compare YouTube [0] and Grooveshark. Grooveshark, for most part, was an amazing service. They were at the forefront of UI design, brilliant at surfacing new and related content (music), excellent at quality of service (variable bit-rate buffering).
You would think that with a good exit to a company like Yahoo or Amazon, it could have really been a hit. I could easily imagine Google gobbling them up and merging it with Vevo. It isn't a dramatically different service than YouTube. But it wasn't to be.
Doesn't it make sense to open source code when you know the product is dying?
[0] http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/04/23/cheaper-bandwidth-...