GrooveShark Shuts Down Services Completely (updated)
Updated content after the break - Big and bad news in streaming land, music streaming service GrooveShark possibly needs to pay 736 million UD dollars (680 million Euro) to the American music industry after a judge rules that the company has been sharing 5000 songs illegal, that would be $150,000 in damages per song with names like Eminem, Green Day and Madonna.
Reuters reports on this story today that U.S. District Judge Thomas Griesa, who will preside over the trial in federal court in Manhattan, said in a court order on Thursday that because of Grooveshark's actions he will tell jurors they can choose to award the statutory maximum of $150,000 in damages per song. Jurors also could decide to award less. But if the jury awards that amount, Grooveshark's parent company, Escape Media Group Inc, could be forced to pay more than $736 million.
As Reuters reports:
Last September, Griesa ruled that Escape and its founders, Samuel Tarantino and Joshua Greenberg, were liable for the illegal uploads of thousands of recordings by artists such as Madonna, Eminem, Bob Marley and Jay-Z.
Griesa said the defendants had directed their employees to make the uploads in spite of the legal risk. The only question to be resolved at Monday's trial is how much Escape must pay as in penalties for the infringement.
Nine record companies including Arista Music, Sony Music Entertainment, UMG Recordings, and Warner Bros Records, sued Escape for infringement in 2011.
Griesa found in September that Escape's business plan was to exploit the copyrighted content in order to grow Grooveshark and then "beg forgiveness" from the labels.
Escape hopes to limit its losses at trial by arguing there were mitigating circumstances to the infringement, according to court papers. In Thursday's order, Griesa said he will allow the company to present evidence of its attempts to secure licenses from the record labels.
Gainesville, Florida-based Grooveshark describes itself as "one of the largest on-demand music services on the Internet" with more than 30 million users sharing over 15 million files. The company says it has a policy to honor copyright holders' "takedown" requests that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
In court papers, the plaintiffs have called Grooveshark a "linear descendant" of Grokster, LimeWire and Napster, all of which had been shut down because of copyright infringement.
A spokesman for Grooveshark said the company had no comment. Representatives for the record labels could not immediately be reached.
--
Update: May 1st 2015
GrooveShark have now shut down their service. You can see their farewell message on the website http://grooveshark.com/
Senior Member
Posts: 761
Joined: 2014-02-23
Hard to say, I'd hope not. TorrentFreak had an article a while back about how these claimed settlement amounts are bull but any settlement agreement involves lying about it.
Senior Member
Posts: 19562
Joined: 2010-04-21
I can't see a judge fining a single mother millions of dollars for sharing a few MP3s, then jailing her indefinitely when she obviously couldn't pay
And if that did happen, I have a feeling we would have heard about it big time, there would have been petitions and uproars all over the place
All we heard was that it apparently happened, nothing else - doesn't sound likely, just look at what's happening for paid mods lol
Senior Member
Posts: 7757
Joined: 2005-12-06
The one big case a few years back against Jammie Thomas-Rasset went back and forth for years. Read up on that one to see how stupid copyright law in the US is. Even a settlement of $5,000 is ridiculous for the 24 songs she supposedly shared. I think she ended up declaring bankruptcy so she didn't have to pay anything anyway.
Senior Member
Posts: 2796
Joined: 2011-05-17
Bankruptcy is not what it appears to be. What monies are owed and wiped out/forgiven is deemed income by the IRS. Bankruptcy does not get one out of owing taxes. So still a penalty just not as much.
Senior Member
Posts: 19562
Joined: 2010-04-21
Yes they've made examples of people in the past to try to control piracy through fear. The usual, reports of single mothers locked away for an eternity for downloading a song or two and being unable to make large enough payments towards $150000 per song.
All it did was spark outrage and people pirated harder. And yet they continue.
Think they really locked anyone up? Sounds more like a purposely started rumour