Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Universal Music Sues Grooveshark for 100,000 Illegal Uploads

techland.time.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 78 posts

Re: Universal Music Sues Grooveshark for 100,000 Illegal Uploads

#11

Post by apaitch »

DevX101 wrote: post #7

Universal doesn't want a settlement or share of ad revenue. They want Grooveshark gone. A Universal insider was quoted as saying the label has declared 'legal jihad' against the startup.[1] This was 1 year ago. So they've had plenty of time to build their war strategy. Besides, even if Grooveshark wanted to make a deal (I'm sure they do), they couldn't afford Universal. The vast majority of grooveshark users don't pa…

I don't know about the legal jihad... It's uncharacteristic for a corporation to wage "ideological" wars. At the same time, I don't think Universal is naive enough to think that the millions of Grooveshark members will suddenly start buying music just because Grooveshark is gone. I think they just want to batter Grooveshark into something more like Spotify/Pandora (i.e. bound by licensing agreement and such). Of course Grooveshark doesn't seem like it wants to bend, so it may go down. Nonetheless, I don't think that's the main goal...

Re: Universal Music Sues Grooveshark for 100,000 Illegal Uploads

#12

Post by benvanderbeek »

purephase wrote: post #2

I'm not really surprised. I've always been astounded that Grooveshark (which is an awesome service, I use it everyday) was able to do what they do. I figured that the labels were simply building enough evidence to simply destroy the service outright which will clearly send a message to anyone else who wants to do something similar. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

I agree. I'm a paying customer, I love Grooveshark (and the jailbreak-only iPhone app that I've missed since switching to the 4S), but it's always been obvious that it's just a matter of time before they get shut down. I'm surprised they've lasted this long.

Re: Universal Music Sues Grooveshark for 100,000 Illegal Uploads

#14

Post by redthrowaway »

physcab wrote: post #6

As a former employee of GS I can say that getting sued is nothing new and may in fact be a good thing for them in a wierd and twisted way. The reason being is that sometimes (this was the case with EMI atleast) the labels use a lawsuit to begin negotiations. Getting sued is almost like a stamp of approval. Obviously I don't know anything about this lawsuit but if they can outlast the legal costs and emerge with a str…

I really see this as more of an attempt to kill GS than to extract any value from them. The music industry is not going to just lie down and accept their irrelevance; they'll take out as many people as possible with them.

Re: Universal Music Sues Grooveshark for 100,000 Illegal Uploads

#15

Post by redthrowaway »

rick888 wrote: post #13

This was only a matter of time. I've been using Grooveshark for a couple of years now and I didn't even know they were illegal (I figured they had deals with all of the record companies) until I saw info posted about it here on HN.

They aren't technically illegal, as they (in theory) comply with takedown requests. Now, if GS staff are uploading songs themselves, then the safe harbor provision of the DMCA doesn't apply and they're in a world of legal hurt. IIRC, Universal's claim that staff are uploading the songs comes from an anonymous posting on a message board, so I doubt that claim will hold up if that's all it's based on.

Re: Universal Music Sues Grooveshark for 100,000 Illegal Uploads

#16

Post by rcaught »

"UMG is seeking maximum damages of up to $150,000 per infringement from Grooveshark, which could mean more than a $15 billion payout if the lawsuit is successful."

Those numbers seem ridiculous. I imagine the only real purpose they serve is to create fear in similar / emerging ventures and to set an upper bound that guarantees bankruptcy.

It seems as pointless as condemning somebody to 1000 death sentences.

Re: Universal Music Sues Grooveshark for 100,000 Illegal Uploads

#17

Post by kittxkat »

pork wrote: post #5

The sad thing about this whole deal is that Grooveshark is awesome! Nevermind the fact that a simple Firefox plugin lets you download the MP3 for each song that you listen to for free... In retrospect, it's only a matter of time before the labels go all Napster on their ass.

    Nevermind the fact that a simple Firefox plugin lets you download the MP3 for each song that you listen to for free...
Well, you could've also done that in combination with Youtube instead of GS (s/grooveshark/youtube).

Re: Universal Music Sues Grooveshark for 100,000 Illegal Uploads

#18

Post by cookiecaper »

apaitch wrote: post #11
DevX101 wrote: post #7

Universal doesn't want a settlement or share of ad revenue. They want Grooveshark gone. A Universal insider was quoted as saying the label has declared 'legal jihad' against the startup.[1] This was 1 year ago. So they've had plenty of time to build their war strategy. Besides, even if Grooveshark wanted to make a deal (I'm sure they do), they couldn't afford Universal. The vast majority of grooveshark users don't pa…

I don't know about the legal jihad... It's uncharacteristic for a corporation to wage "ideological" wars. At the same time, I don't think Universal is naive enough to think that the millions of Grooveshark members will suddenly start buying music just because Grooveshark is gone. I think they just want to batter Grooveshark into something more like Spotify/Pandora (i.e. bound by licensing agreement and such). Of cour…

>It's uncharacteristic for a corporation to wage "ideological" wars

I thoroughly disagree with this. Corporations often wage "ideological" "wars". That's what lobbying is all about -- a corporation has decided Public Policy X will either help or harm their corporate interests, so they pay lobbyists to advocate for or against it.

Media companies like Universal, Disney, et al guard copyright very closely. They want to advocate the belief that intellectual property is identical to physical property and that the only rights anyone has to an idea are the rights that the idea's copyright owner decides they should have (usually granted when the petitioners include a large check with their request for rights).

Copyright is the most vital issue to media companies and they treat it as such. If they find what they believe to be gross infringement, they are not kind to its purveyors -- I think we've had enough history in filesharing to know that.

Grooveshark is just another way to skin the cat. Its extensive (and some would say "egregious") use of DMCA safe harbor provisions I think probably is one of the major inspirations for SOPA and PROTECT-IP. Cases against Kazaa, Grokster, and others did not come attached with new legislation because they didn't really have a plausible case under the DMCA. Grooveshark's service-oriented approach makes them a clear safe harbor, and unless Grooveshark quickly sees legitimization as a marketing channel and gets "white-knighted" a la YouTube and Google, they will remain rogue and the media companies will keep hounding until they get at the jugular. Since Grooveshark is using DMCA as a cover, the media companies just want complete control over "the internet" (i.e., the internet as most people know it, DNS) so they can send the Federal Bureau of Cybercrime Protection a notice and have Grooveshark or other services with a plausible legal defense blacklisted just like that -- no need for pesky "trials" when records companies are losing hypothetical money!

It should be common knowledge by now that old media will keep at this game until it ruins them. They are absolutely committed to it, and they will fight to death -- either theirs or ours -- to get copyright the way they want it, so that they can gain more cash from the so-called "lost sales" perpetrated by anyone listening to major label music or watching major studio movies but not buying at retail or iTunes.

Re: Universal Music Sues Grooveshark for 100,000 Illegal Uploads

#19

Post by adamcw »

betterth wrote: post #8
DevX101 wrote: post #7

Universal doesn't want a settlement or share of ad revenue. They want Grooveshark gone. A Universal insider was quoted as saying the label has declared 'legal jihad' against the startup.[1] This was 1 year ago. So they've had plenty of time to build their war strategy. Besides, even if Grooveshark wanted to make a deal (I'm sure they do), they couldn't afford Universal. The vast majority of grooveshark users don't pa…

One wonders how Spotify is succeeding where Grooveshark is failing.

Grooveshark did this without inking the necessary deals. If I understand correctly, their library is provided by their users uploading.

Re: Universal Music Sues Grooveshark for 100,000 Illegal Uploads

#20

Post by physcab »

redthrowaway wrote: post #14
physcab wrote: post #6

As a former employee of GS I can say that getting sued is nothing new and may in fact be a good thing for them in a wierd and twisted way. The reason being is that sometimes (this was the case with EMI atleast) the labels use a lawsuit to begin negotiations. Getting sued is almost like a stamp of approval. Obviously I don't know anything about this lawsuit but if they can outlast the legal costs and emerge with a str…

I really see this as more of an attempt to kill GS than to extract any value from them. The music industry is not going to just lie down and accept their irrelevance; they'll take out as many people as possible with them.

You are probably right but this is a war of attrition. There are many, if not the majority, of industry music types who will act this way, but the old guard is literally dying away. So if GS doesn't outlast then a new company most certainly will, it's just a question of when. The power is starting to shift to the artists anyways, and I predict you'll soon start seeing the music industry being run by former artists or artist managers. Take a look at Troy Carter for example, who is Lady Gaga's manager. I'm pretty sure he is an investor in Turntable.fm.
Post reply on HN