Grooveshark makes a stand against the music industry.(androidpolice.com) |
Grooveshark makes a stand against the music industry.(androidpolice.com) |
They have something against vendors (like Google and Apple) prematurely pulling out their app from their respective markets/stores because of their ignorance of the law.
I look at the actions of Google in two ways, they have either received a lot of complaints from the governing body and their hand was forced or they really are releasing their own cloud music store and they are getting rid of potential competitors.
I hope its the first reason as I really like Google and their ethics.
I have had personal dealings with the music industry though and how licenses work. In some cases they do not even check the legality of a music provider and presume they are acting illegally because their business model looks illegal. They are going against their own policy of innovation to get them out the mess they are in.
I hate to say it but I think if/when Apple/Google release their own version of the cloud music player, the rest are screwed anyway. They will find some way of making the software so integrated with their phones that it's pointless to use any 3rd party software like Spotify or Grooveshark.
Google on the other hand us HOPEFULLY working on something great for their Android devices..
I also believe that is one of the main reasons they are labeled as "the boogieman," in addition to some pretty boneheaded PR moves.
So, this isn't a comprehensive answer, but hopefully shines some light on where HTML5 actually is with regard to providing an experience similar to a native app.
I personally think we are stuck in a transitional period between traditional music and digital music. The traditional sense of what Amazon is doing is completely illegal, when you upload a file you are technically making a copy of it which technically you could share with others. In a traditional sense all these services are illegal in some respect.
We need new legislation that has clear guidelines. We need a clear way of letting these companies legally share music. There should be a clear port of call for all music providers such as these to try and make a go with their products.
I think they are spending too much time fighting these companies and telling them they are wrong rather than guiding them in the right direction.
I may be way off mark here but as a developer I would not touch anything to do with music licensing again. I really feel for Grooveshark, I have used the service and it looks like they have put their heart and soul into that product and instead of a great big "Thanks for helping the music industry", they get kicked.
I think the biggest issue for music startups (disclaimer: I used to work for one) is probably that the startups that try to do it legally and correctly are still competing against the ones that border on being illegal, or are straight-up illegal. Users don't care, but startups might get sued.
All of that aside, I agree that Grooveshark has built a great product. But I'd be kidding myself if I didn't also say the first song I searched for was Metallica and I got a massive list of songs I could listen to. I'm sure they wouldn't be happy.
I think its hard to make an unbaised decision on the company and how I feel about this take down decision because I do not know the complete inner workings, only what Grooveshark tell us. They could tell us they are paying fees when they are clearly not, they could say all royalties are being honoured, when again they could not be.
It's all assumption led but I know that whatever is happening is not good for the end user. I was going to pay for their mobile version and I didn't question the legality of it either. To the average user, all this messing around means that when Google or Apple release their own product then every "normal" user will jump ship for it because they know it's there to stay rather than being worried it will be dropped at any point. The end user doesn't generally have any loyalty, they just want to listen to music.