A new illegal clone of the illegal streaming site Grooveshark sprang to life in recent months. It has been appearing as the top hit in Google searches for “grooveshark,” and that has helped it to gain interest, particularly in Brazil and the U.S. Continue Reading
Grooveshark was formally closed down in May after settling with the RIAA, but the questionably legal streaming site stayed alive as a series of clones. Today the recording industry group won a successful case against the reincarnated Grooveshark site. Continue Reading
Brief news items and worthy reads from around the web: Report on music services and social engagement; infographic of Grooveshark legal fees; latest iOS 8.4 beta shows more music updates. Continue Reading
The legal saga centered around the Grooveshark name appears to be getting a bizarre epilogue. Last week, Grooveshark finally resigned itself to its fate and shuttered its doors. However, the long-beleagured site and its legally uncertain approach to streaming music appears to have returned to the web. Continue Reading
We reported on Monday that Grooveshark was facing potentially immense financial damages judgment in its drawn-out copyright infringement trial with record labels. That particular threat appears to be neutralized in a settlement which includes the final closure of Grooveshark.com, the service, and a handover of all company assets. Continue Reading
After a six-month pause, the trial of UMG vs. Escape Media resumes today with a jury in place to set damages after a ruling of copyright infringement last September. Escape Media is the parent company of Grooveshark. the damages verdict could range as high as $736-million for the full statutory penalty. Continue Reading
EMI Music has won a summary judgement against Grooveshark’s parent company on charges that the streaming platform infringed on its copyrights. There is a court date set for May 8 to determine the final damages, but they could end up being as high as $420 million for the 2,807 copyrighted tracks EMI found on the streaming service. Continue Reading
In an interview with Dow Jones, Grooveshark CEO Sam Tarantino discussed how the company might be able to stay afloat by completely legal avenues. The streaming platform is expected to launch a radio app called Broadcasts in January. A rep from the company called Broadcasts the “first compliant app” for Grooveshark. Continue Reading
Plugging on despite its legal woes, Grooveshark announced a new plan for a live concert series. Grooveshark Presents aims to tap into the platform’s community for input and suggestions as it plans the events. “We are removing the significant risks promoters take in booking talent, simply by combining the intelligence gathered from our streaming platform with our unique ability to communicate with our listeners,” CEO and cofounder Sam Tarantino said. Continue Reading
Grooveshark received some damning news from a New York district court judge yesterday, but it is still trying to swim on. Today the streaming and uploading service shared a blog post with a response to the ruling. “This latest news dealt specifically with an early version of Grooveshark which we dispensed of in 2008 in favor of our current music streaming service,” the company said. Continue Reading
It seems yesterday’s news was just the tip of the iceberg in Grooveshark’s copyright woes. Today, a district court judge ruled that Grooveshark is liable for copyright infringement because its employees uploaded tracks without the labels’ permission. The judge determined that these uploads were not protected by the DCMA safe harbor provisions. Continue Reading
Sirius XM was on the receiving end of some bad copyright news last week, and this week the recipient is Grooveshark. Universal Music Group is pushing for a summary judgment, claiming that it is the owner of pre-1972 recordings played on the streaming service. Since Grooveshark’s users are the ones uploading content and since labels can issue takedown notices, the platform has argued that it is covered by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act’s safe harbors and thus is not liable for infringement. Universal is arguing that this provision should not apply to the music dating before 1972. Continue Reading