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

The Grooveshark Settlement [pdf]

beckermanlegal.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 54 posts

Re: The Grooveshark Settlement [pdf]

#12

Post by forthefuture »

detaro wrote: post #9
rawnlq wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A different domain can't possibly access the local storage for grooveshark.com right?

Good point. People discussed different ways to get to the parts stored in localstorage, but that obviously only should work locally. Since Groovebackup got shutdown as well we can't check what they did.

You can still go to grooveshark.com and see your localStorage.

Re: The Grooveshark Settlement [pdf]

#13

Post by LiquidFlux »

arihant wrote: post #11

The message they posted a day before this settlement - http://grooveshark.com/ I'm confused, didn't Grooveshark just provided aggregation and a streaming player with playlist management? The music was not hosted by Grooveshark right?

I thought you could upload to Grooveshark.

Re: The Grooveshark Settlement [pdf]

#14

Post by Confusion »

legutierr wrote: post #10

Two thoughts on this. First: I was an occasional user of Grooveshark, and whenever I used the service (which had a brilliant UI, by the way) I found myself wondering how they could still be operating, given that they weren't licensed by the major labels. It felt like Napster in a web app, only more centralized (and thus, easier to take down, one would think). Well, the answer seems to be that they have been fighting…

Spotify is effectively label-owned.

Re: The Grooveshark Settlement [pdf]

#15

Post by FreakyT »

It's really unfortunate that they were taken down. Sure, there exist paid services like Spotify, but when there's only licensable content you miss out on all weird obscure stuff that Grooveshark had, like video game soundtracks, chiptunes, and international music not licensed abroad.

If only every one of these large record labels could just instantly go out of business, simultaneously. That would be wonderful...

Re: The Grooveshark Settlement [pdf]

#16

Post by Lazare »

legutierr wrote: post #10

Two thoughts on this. First: I was an occasional user of Grooveshark, and whenever I used the service (which had a brilliant UI, by the way) I found myself wondering how they could still be operating, given that they weren't licensed by the major labels. It felt like Napster in a web app, only more centralized (and thus, easier to take down, one would think). Well, the answer seems to be that they have been fighting…

> The front-end system that Grooveshark built [...] is now jointly owned by the major labels. They cannot possibly be short-sighted enough just to throw that away.

Uhhh. I'm honestly confused. Is this sarcasm? Because if there's one thing that major labels have demonstrated, it's a willingness to be short-sighted.

Re: The Grooveshark Settlement [pdf]

#17

Post by bsbechtel »

legutierr wrote: post #10

Two thoughts on this. First: I was an occasional user of Grooveshark, and whenever I used the service (which had a brilliant UI, by the way) I found myself wondering how they could still be operating, given that they weren't licensed by the major labels. It felt like Napster in a web app, only more centralized (and thus, easier to take down, one would think). Well, the answer seems to be that they have been fighting…

How good was their business model? They survived for 10 years, including financing what I'm sure were expensive legal battles, but how much of that was from revenue and how much from equity/debt financing?

Re: The Grooveshark Settlement [pdf]

#19

Post by oldmanjay »

legutierr wrote: post #10

Two thoughts on this. First: I was an occasional user of Grooveshark, and whenever I used the service (which had a brilliant UI, by the way) I found myself wondering how they could still be operating, given that they weren't licensed by the major labels. It felt like Napster in a web app, only more centralized (and thus, easier to take down, one would think). Well, the answer seems to be that they have been fighting…

I hope that you're logically consistent and also consider other people who make their money by trampling on rights to be gutsy. for instance, gangsters, fraudsters, spammers... all have a similar business model in that they make money by ignoring the legal framework of their chosen business. certainly does take guts!
Post reply on HN