After almost a decade, the music industry has killed Grooveshark

TECHi's Author Sal McCloskey
Opposing Author Theregister Read Source Article
Last Updated
TECHi's Take
Sal McCloskey
Sal McCloskey
  • Words 77
  • Estimated Read 1 min

Grooveshark has been around for almost a decade, and has been in legal battles with the music industry for just as long. Unfortunately for users of the music streaming service, it looks like the battles are finally over, and Grooveshark has lost. The company’s website now links to a single image which explains why it’s going away and includes an apology to the music industry for not securing the rights to the music it streamed. 

Theregister

Theregister

  • Words 185
  • Estimated Read 1 min
Read Article

Music streaming service Grooveshark has closed its doors, after admitting hadn’t acquired rights to the music it streamed. The company on Thursday (US time) replaced its website with the statement below. The writing’s been on the wall for Grooveshark for some time, as earlier this week it learned it would likely need to find US$750m to satisfy litigants who accused it of piracy on a grand scale. The company had been trying to go legit for a while, but had run an argument that it could stream whatever it wanted to unless confronted with a formal takedown request. That argument is now a smouldering ruin as, presumably, is the reported US$4.7m invested in the company over the years. Streaming music remains controversial, because while the likes of Spotify and Pandora are legitimate, musicians like countrified popette Taylor Swift think it offers a raw deal, royalties-wise. For the listening public, Grooveshark’s demise probably won’t matter given the proliferation of legal competitors. Startups who try to “disrupt” markets by flouting laws, however, now have a nasty cautionary case study to consider.

Source

NOTE: TECHi Two-Takes are the stories we have chosen from the web along with a little bit of our opinion in a paragraph. Please check the original story in the Source Button below.

Balanced Perspective

TECHi weighs both sides before reaching a conclusion.

TECHi’s editorial take above outlines the reasoning that supports this position.

More Two Takes from Theregister

Exploiting cheap labor isn’t why Apple makes its products in China
Exploiting cheap labor isn’t why Apple makes its products in China

We all know the reason why so many technology companies manufacture their consumer electronics in China: labor costs in the…

Hilary Clinton wants Silicon Valley to help combat terrorism
Hilary Clinton wants Silicon Valley to help combat terrorism

Hillary Clinton is far from the only politician taking advantage of the recent attacks in Paris to call for weaker encryption,…

Europe just dealt a massive blow to American technology companies
Europe just dealt a massive blow to American technology companies

The controversial "Safe Harbor" laws that allowed technology companies to move user data between the Europe Union and the United States were ruled…

Microsoft has developed its own Linux-based operating system
Microsoft has developed its own Linux-based operating system

Considering Microsoft's history of exclusivity to its own ecosystem, it's still a little weird to see the company releasing products…