All Major Labels Are Suing Grooveshark • Hacker News Board

Re: All Major Labels Are Suing Grooveshark

#21

Post by gldalmaso » Fri, Jan 06, 2012, 6:34 PM UTC

mikeryan wrote: post #19

gldalmaso wrote: post #17

Nice move if what they want is for all of Grooveshark users worldwide start downloading music again when they manage to shut it down.

From my understanding (could be wrong) the label's aren't getting paid for their music through Grooveshark, so if they're not getting paid they'd likely prefer to force users to jump through the hoops of pirating music then from using a service such as Grooveshark. (actually they'd prefer you use a free service like Spotify which pays for the music rights).

But it would be much more viable to elaborate deals and get paid through Grooveshark.

What I'm saying is that they would benefit a lot more from having Grooveshark as an ally (even if not entirely on their terms) then defeating it and getting back to square zero in the anti-piracy effort.

Re: All Major Labels Are Suing Grooveshark

#22

Post by tomjen3 » Fri, Jan 06, 2012, 6:35 PM UTC

Kylekramer wrote: post #10

paulhauggis wrote: post #7

I wish Grooveshark was a legal service. I haven't downloaded any music since I've started using it. It's sad that the labels can't take a hint. The music business is changing (just like the software business). Businesses that don't go with the flow will eventually be left behind.

I usually anti-label, but in this case, I don't see the problem. It isn't like the labels are against all you can eat streaming services. They even support "free" ones, like Spotify and Mog. They just want a cut/ownership of the services. The only difference between Grooveshark and Spotify/Mog is a slightly larger library (due to Grooveshark's grey legality), international availability (annoying for the other service…

But if it wasn't for these 'small' differences Grooveshark wouldn't be a service worth paying for.

Yes I said paying for. I have been a subscriber for ages. Get with the program and get some revenue sharing system set up -- one where the money goes to the artists and not to RIAAs laywers.

With the current state of Washingtonian corruption there is no hope in hell to update the laws legally. Is it really so bad that the laws are being updated illegally?

Re: All Major Labels Are Suing Grooveshark

#23

Post by goblin89 » Fri, Jan 06, 2012, 6:51 PM UTC

mikeryan wrote: post #19

gldalmaso wrote: post #17

Nice move if what they want is for all of Grooveshark users worldwide start downloading music again when they manage to shut it down.

From my understanding (could be wrong) the label's aren't getting paid for their music through Grooveshark, so if they're not getting paid they'd likely prefer to force users to jump through the hoops of pirating music then from using a service such as Grooveshark. (actually they'd prefer you use a free service like Spotify which pays for the music rights).

I would, if Spotify was available in my country.

> they'd likely prefer to force users to jump through the hoops of pirating music

A side effect of which probably would be more users becoming “torrent-educated”.

Also, there's a huge difference between listening to music only on Grooveshark, and having the tracks (CD) bought and lying around on your drive. In the first case you don't own the music.

If you're downloading it, however, the difference almost vanishes, and you have much less reason to pay. You have the files already—so are able to listen without the connection, put it on your player, etc. Like you've bought the music, but without the money.

Re: All Major Labels Are Suing Grooveshark

#24

Post by thesis » Fri, Jan 06, 2012, 6:56 PM UTC

paulhauggis wrote: post #12

Kylekramer wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I usually anti-label, but in this case, I don't see the problem. It isn't like the labels are against all you can eat streaming services. They even support "free" ones, like Spotify and Mog. They just want a cut/ownership of the services. The only difference between Grooveshark and Spotify/Mog is a slightly larger library (due to Grooveshark's grey legality), international availability (annoying for the other service…

I'm generally against copyright infringement/intellectual property theft. I guess I was just trying to say I want more legal services like this. You have some great points. I haven't had a chance to use spotify.

I like Spotify a lot more regardless of the copyright issues. The added bonus is that Spotify is okay in the eyes of the people who own the music I'm listening too.

You should really try it out.

Re: All Major Labels Are Suing Grooveshark

#25

Post by grosbisou » Fri, Jan 06, 2012, 7:01 PM UTC

gldalmaso wrote: post #17

Nice move if what they want is for all of Grooveshark users worldwide start downloading music again when they manage to shut it down.

i didnt find a way to extract all the songs from My Music via the interface.

this stuff should do the trick : javascript: $('div .grid-canvas .slick-row').each(function(index) { console.log($(this).find('div.song').text() + '- ' + $(this).find('div.album').text()); });

Re: All Major Labels Are Suing Grooveshark

#26

Post by wmf » Fri, Jan 06, 2012, 7:05 PM UTC

kiloaper wrote: post #11

I guess Grooveshark strategy of it being "easier to ask for forgiveness later than it is to ask for permission now" has failed. ( http://www.thecmuwebsite.com/article/grooveshark-emails-on-l... )

Did that strategy work for any music startup?

Re: All Major Labels Are Suing Grooveshark

#27

Post by slouch » Fri, Jan 06, 2012, 7:11 PM UTC

jessevondoom wrote: post #16

I work in music, with a lot of indie labels and musicians, and for once the ENTIRE industry is inline on something. Grooveshark has been actively hostile to artists requesting their music be removed from the service, their terms are unfriendly and their staff is rude, and if even a fraction of the allegations against their management are true they should be held personally accountable. Everyone in this industry under…

If grooveshark gets shut down tomorrow and I don't get a refund for the rest of 2012, it is still worth what I've paid for this year in advance.

I don't work in music. I don't want to download desktop software or mp3s. Does anyone offer a comparable service?

Re: All Major Labels Are Suing Grooveshark

#28

Post by earbitscom » Fri, Jan 06, 2012, 7:14 PM UTC

slouch wrote: post #27

jessevondoom wrote: post #16

I work in music, with a lot of indie labels and musicians, and for once the ENTIRE industry is inline on something. Grooveshark has been actively hostile to artists requesting their music be removed from the service, their terms are unfriendly and their staff is rude, and if even a fraction of the allegations against their management are true they should be held personally accountable. Everyone in this industry under…

If grooveshark gets shut down tomorrow and I don't get a refund for the rest of 2012, it is still worth what I've paid for this year in advance. I don't work in music. I don't want to download desktop software or mp3s. Does anyone offer a comparable service?

Rhapsody and Rdio are pretty close. They're like Spotify but I believe both have browser based access. Catalog is a little smaller but I hear plenty of people say they prefer them over Spotify. None of them competes with Grooveshark's catalog, because a huge chunk of Grooveshark's catalog is not there legally.

Re: All Major Labels Are Suing Grooveshark

#29

Post by MadGouki » Fri, Jan 06, 2012, 7:17 PM UTC

tomjen3 wrote: post #22

Kylekramer wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I usually anti-label, but in this case, I don't see the problem. It isn't like the labels are against all you can eat streaming services. They even support "free" ones, like Spotify and Mog. They just want a cut/ownership of the services. The only difference between Grooveshark and Spotify/Mog is a slightly larger library (due to Grooveshark's grey legality), international availability (annoying for the other service…

But if it wasn't for these 'small' differences Grooveshark wouldn't be a service worth paying for. Yes I said paying for. I have been a subscriber for ages. Get with the program and get some revenue sharing system set up -- one where the money goes to the artists and not to RIAAs laywers. With the current state of Washingtonian corruption there is no hope in hell to update the laws legally. Is it really so bad that t…

Dr. King once said "One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws."

I have to think he meant it in a different way, but it's still something I believe to be true. The laws regarding IP and copyright are obviously broken. I hope the record labels are missing out on enough money to go bankrupt, they've certainly worn out their good will and outgrown their usefulness in this digital world.

Re: All Major Labels Are Suing Grooveshark

#30

Post by lubos » Fri, Jan 06, 2012, 7:17 PM UTC

wmf wrote: post #26

kiloaper wrote: post #11

I guess Grooveshark strategy of it being "easier to ask for forgiveness later than it is to ask for permission now" has failed. ( http://www.thecmuwebsite.com/article/grooveshark-emails-on-l... )

Did that strategy work for any music startup?

it worked for youtube/google