Msg#: 4392262 posted 11:45 pm on Nov 29, 2011 (gmt 0)
Grooveshark deliberately set out to build a huge online following without paying for the music it streamed and shared in order to establish a stronger negotiating position with record labels, according to internal emails included in court records.
Earlier this month, Universal Music Group, the largest of the four top record companies, filed a copyright lawsuit in federal court against Escape Media Group, parent company of Grooveshark, a music service that enables users to share songs with other users. In the complaint, Universal Music accuses Grooveshark's leadership of copyright infringement and claims that managers uploaded pirated songs themselves.
[news.cnet.com...] Content is content. Copyright holders need to protect their content (intellectual property) or things like this might happen.
Msg#: 4392262 posted 2:57 pm on Dec 2, 2011 (gmt 0)
as long as they respond to requests to remove copyright material promptly it doesn’t matter that the exact same material reappears a few days later.
Thats about the size of it, the digital music business is a bit like the wild west. As company we have been on both sides of the fence. Sometimes we get asked to take products down other times im asking DMS's to take products down.
There are a lot of people putting out content they probably shouldn't. It incredibly hard to regulate.
In Groovesharks defence it is the responsiblity of the content provider to not deliver problem content. Most digital Media Serives dont even know until they get contacted from the actual copyright holders asking for it to be taken down. If grooveshark knew what they were uploading then they have got a big problem.
Think I better check grooveshark for my companies content!
Grooveshark is one DMS we dont actually work with.