SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Provides an example of how laws only matter insofar as the people agree to follow them. If everybody wants something, it will be had, irrespective of corporate fiddling.
Grooveshark was a music-streaming site that was finally shut down by the music industry last week due to the revelation of deliberate violations of copyright by employees. Employees had uploaded music tracks themselves to bolster Grooveshark's catalog, in contrast to other services (e.g. YouTube) that simply take down user-uploaded content in response to DMCA notices and are not liable for copyright infringement of the users.
TorrentFreak reports that the widely-reported "clone" that emerged soon after Grooveshark's demise is actually a reskin of another site, MP3Juices.se:
We concede that to some the idea of a reincarnated Grooveshark will be a somewhat romantic one but as we highlighted at the weekend, the practice of passing one site off as another is now really getting out of hand.
Only time will tell if Grooveshark.io will magically transform into a proper replacement for the now defunct site, complete with playlist and community features for example, but it seems unlikely.
As things stand Grooveshark.io appears to be just a re-badged/re-skinned clone of MP3Juices.se, a low-traffic clone of the original MP3Juices. In the scheme of things it's hardly likely to be an important target for the RIAA, except for one small detail. The labels now own all of Grooveshark's intellectual property – brand names and trademarks included...
(Score: 5, Interesting) by hash14 on Monday May 11 2015, @02:10AM
Now they we've seen Tidal fail, the music industry can understand how difficult it is to build a music streaming service. So why not use grooveshark to build a service that they sanction? Tons of people have lamented that Grooveshark was a great way to find new music that they enjoyed so that they could ultimately purchase it from another service if they liked. In the long run, this will actually hurt the RIAA more than it will help. At the very least, they could point Grooveshark's huge user base to services where they could stream or download the files in exchange for a payment (or they could build said service from Grooveshark itself if they _really_ wanted to be smart). Anyone who legitimately appreciates music and the cultural value it brings would show appreciation for users who use Grooveshark so enthusiastically and try to cater to them.
But then you realize that this is an industry that's actually hostile to its audience rather than appreciative. Rather than allow people to explore and listen to what they like, the RIAA goes around acting like they should be able to dictate what people like and listen to (like the modern crap that they've been marketing for the past 20+ years). So they shut it down and direct them to services that they control like Pandora where they can force users to listen to the same drivel and crap over and over again and _tell_ them that's what they like, rather than letting them choose freely.