Once again, Grooveshark just cannot seem to win.
Grooveshark, a digital music service that lets people stream millions of songs free, is facing multiple lawsuits from the major powers of the music industry, including two suits for copyright infringement and another one over royalty payments. Last year, Google and Apple both removed its app from their stores, and Grooveshark - which has 35 million users - suspected that complaints by the labels was the reason.
Earlier this week it seemed that Grooveshark and its parent company, Escape Media Group, had won a battle when its mobile app reappeared on Google's Android store, more than a year after being removed. But the victory was short lived. On Thursday afternoon, the app vanished once again.
Google did not announce a reason for the removal. But the company took the uncharacteristic step of rebutting a statement by Grooveshark.
On Tuesday, when its app reappeared on the Android store, Grooveshark suggested that the change was the result of cooperation with Google. “After working closely with Google to get rogue apps removed, we're delighted that the official Grooveshark app has been reinstated in the Android market,†the company, based in Gainesville, Fla., said in a statement.
A Google spokeswoman countered late Thursday that the company had not worked with Grooveshark to reinstate the app, and added that the program was removed for a violation of Google's policies for developers. Google did not specify which of those policies were violated, but the most likely reason, if only by process of elimination - violence and bullying, no; gambling, no; sexually explicit material , probably not - was copyright infringement.
On Friday morning, Grooveshark said it was not giving up, and noted that a version of its Android app is available on its own site.
“We have filed a counter-notice and are working with Google and their Google Play reinstatement process to get our our app back in the market,†the company said in a statement.
Whether Grooveshark infringes on music copyrights is in dispute. The company says it is legal under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, or D.M.C.A., a federal law that gives Internet companies “safe harbor†if they remove copyrighted material when asked. The major record labels argue that Grooveshark is ineligible for this protection, and that it needs licenses from labels and music publishers to use music.
But in Grooveshark's biggest victory so far, a New York state judge recently ruled in its favor about a detail of the D.M.C.A. The judge found that the law could be applied to music made bef ore 1972, when federal copyright law was first applied to sound recordings. To those fortunate enough not to follow the ins and outs of music copyright, this may sound like an academic point. But it's an important legal distinction, and the ruling gave Grooveshark and Escape Media a big advantage in the case, one of the two infringement suits against it.
As if ejection from Google's app store were not enough misfortune for one day, on Thursday Grooveshark and Escape Media were sued yet again. In a case filed in United States District Court in Manhattan, EMI Music accused Grooveshark of failing to pay royalties and, once again, of copyright infringement.
EMI had been the one major label to license its music to Grooveshark, as part of the settlement in an earlier infringement case. But those licenses were revoked when EMI sued again earlier this year.
“We have been sued and settled with EMI twice now over different issues,†Grooveshark said in a statement on Friday. “It is unfortunate that when disagreements arise, EMI resorts to these types of sue and settle tactics. At the end of the day, we are trying to help labels like EMI solve their problems.â€
For Grooveshark, as with many technology startups that have run afoul of the music industry, its ultimate fate might depend less on whether it wins the suits than on whether it can survive the expenses of so much litigation. In May, MP3tunes, another music service being sued for infringement, filed for bankruptcy.
Ben Sisario writes about the music industry. Follow @sisario on Twitter.
No comments:
Post a Comment