The iPhone app of popular music-streaming service Grooveshark was summarily yanked by the App Store police after a mere week of availability. "Earlier this afternoon," reads a Monday post on Grooveshark's blog, "Apple sent us a letter notifying us that, due to a complaint they received from Universal Music Group UK, Grooveshark …
Strange as it may seem, when UMG are found to be selling music to which they have no rights their attitude is "provide proof of exact amount of your loss and we'll start negotiating, otherwise forget it" (oh, and no we wont make the relevant accounting records available to you); and in the meantime we may or may not stop selling such music because its a pain to organise what with all our subsidiaries and the world being such a big place, and anyway we have better things to do.
Hopefully iTunes and similar organisations have a legal arrangement with suppliers like UMG that covers them from getting caught in the crossfire when they supply "illegal" material in good faith.
No wonder some good apps are Rejected!
The guy that overseas the app store has a side business selling "Fart Apps" for the Apple app store. So when good apps get the rejection notice the Apple App Store directors gets his in.
If you can copyright mucis because it's your creation.
Can i copyright a fart because it's still a sound owned by me?
I could collect royalties from everyone in the world =]
Re: "...copyright a fart..."
Isn't that the App Store's business model?
Apple blames UMG hmm, or is it more likely that Apple has a streaming music player due soon and time to pull any possible competition. Whats next, Spotify being shown the door also!
It is a bit dodgy
But they seem to have used the YouTube loophole to get round legal issues. They will remove songs from the lists if requested by labels for infringement. But the music gets put back up almost immediately by users.
You can't stop people putting what they like on the web without threatening the entire web. i.e the YouTube defence, its impossible to police effectively.
Obviously YouTube are a lot more proactive about it because their business doesn't rely on users uploading copyrighted material.
Still, its a handy app to have, way more choice than Spotify and a lot cheaper, another good reason not to buy iStuff.
The only option
is to jailbreak the piece of shit.
I seem to agree with a Register report...come on Grooveshark stop acting like a footballer going down, get your house in order first and pay the moneys that are due....
I gather that Apple reserves the power to delete apps on whim.
And this isn't just a whim, it's done to please a rich and powerful friend - or enemy. Either way, a smart business move.
Apple has heard of net neutrality and they don't like it.
Amazed they got away with it for a week
I'm surprised Grooveshark got through the App store approval process in the first place. NB. If Grooveshark do get around to paying the labels proper royalties, expect the site to be locked down to certain territories pdq, just like pretty much every other music streaming service.
The music industry
Dear Film / Music industry,
Why not just copyright all your films and music to such an extent that it would be illegal to buy / view / copy / rent / use as toilet paper or whatever. That way, as soon as an artist releases something copyright it to hell and put it in a big vault and hide it away so noone can ever see / hear it.
There that will show them pirates (sorry customers) Yeah.
- JLaw, Kate Upton exposed in celeb nude pics hack
- Google flushes out users of old browsers by serving up CLUNKY, AGED version of search
- China: You, Microsoft. Office-Windows 'compatibility'. You have 20 days to explain
- GCHQ protesters stick it to British spooks ... by drinking urine
- Twitter declines to deny JLaw tweet scrubdown after alleged iCloud NAKED PHOTOS hack