ie8 fix
Click Here

Googling Google

Christopher Dawson

Google joins Apple in banning GrooveShark from its App Market

By | April 7, 2011, 10:31am PDT

Summary: Is it competition, legal concerns, partnerships, or all of the above that got GrooveShark banned from the Android Market?

Last year, Apple banned the music sharing service GrooveShark from its App Store. This week, according to Ars Technica, Google banned it from the Android Market. Most Android users will still be able to get it if they want and iPhone/iTouch users can jailbreak their devices if they really want the app, but for all those people I have one word: Napster.

That’s the message for users since, as Gigaom first described in 2009,

All of the songs streaming on the site were uploaded by users, and Grooveshark doesn’t police its waters for infringing content itself. Rather, Grooveshark relies on the takedown provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, meaning that it will stream a song until someone asks for its removal.

While Ars suggested that Google may be clamping down to avoid any more problems with federal regulators and copyright holders, I’m inclined to believe that both Google and Apple have a competitive interest, as well.

Apple, obviously, has iTunes and has invested a great deal of effort in deals with music companies. Google, on the other hand, has had rumors of a branded music service flying around it for some time now. It also isn’t clear how this will affect Android’s relationship with Amazon, the default music store for most Android phones and now a streaming music service (at least for legally purchased content).

Frankly, I’d be more inclined to see pressure from Amazon as a reason to dump the GrooveShark app. Amazon, after all, with it’s awesome new App Store (arguably much better than Google’s own Android Market) and Cloud Player has made itself the single most important player in the Android software ecosystem, aside from Google itself.

So whether GrooveShark is the next Napster or just another Pandora, and whether Google wants to avoid any more legal nonsense or it just wants to push competitors out of the picture, the company clearly has plenty of reasons to say goodbye to GrooveShark. In fact, like it or not, so do consumers.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Chris Dawson is a freelance writer and consultant with years of experience in educational technology and web-based systems. In 2011, he became the Vice President of Marketing for WizIQ, Inc., a virtual classroom and learning network SaaS provider.

Disclosure

Christopher Dawson

Christopher Dawson is the Vice President of Marketing for WizIQ, Inc., by day and a freelance writer and educational technology consultant by night. Well, most of his colleagues at WizIQ are based in India, so really he's working with them whenever he can stay awake. He has worked for his local school district as a teacher and technology director, for the Johns Hopkins University School of Public Health, and for Biogen, Inc. (now Biogen-IDEC, Inc.). He has also consulted with STATNet and Cytyc Corporation and retains close ties with X2 Development Corporation (now owned by Follett Software, the supplier of the student information system he administered for several years). Follett is paying him a monthly honorarium to act as a presenter for their "SIS Voices for Student Achievement" community (he produces occasional blog posts and hosts a monthly webinar on the use of student information systems to inform data-driven instruction and school-wide change. He regularly purchases and/or recommends Dell hardware. This is because Dell makes good hardware and has truly committed itself to education in innovative ways, particularly with their "Connected Classroom" initiative. It isn't because he has dealings with the company through his role at WizIQ (which he does) or because they have provided him with long-term loans of a variety of equipment for in-depth testing (which they have). Intel (reference designer for the Classmate PCs he has implemented in his local schools) has provided him with long-term loans of Classmate PCs for testing, as have Dell and Lenovo with their educational offerings. He may report on any of these companies as his experiences with them have direct bearing on educational technology; positive reports are not necessarily an endorsement and he receives no direct financial compensation from these companies or any others. Intel paid all expenses for his attendance at the 2009 Intel Classmate PC Ecosystem Summit which he attended as the sole representative of the technology press. He was invited to attend in 2010 but his wife would have killed him if he spent 3 days in Vegas geeking out and left her home alone with a new baby. Acer provided him with a 50% discount on an Aspire One netbook in early 2009 after he tested it for 30 days through their educational seed program. He liked the netbook at the time but it has since broken and sits unused in his office. Canonical sent him Ubuntu lanyards, t-shirts, and mousepads for his kids. He stole one of the lanyards and proudly hangs his keys from it and occasionally features his 8-year old wearing an oversized Ubuntu t-shirt on his Facebook profile. Gunnar Optiks sent him a pair of computer glasses to evaluate for a holiday gift guide. He is wearing them now as he types this because they never asked for them back and they rock out loud. Seriously - they work brilliantly and make it much easier to spend 20 hours a day staring at an LCD. If they ever asked for them back, he would fork over the $99 and buy a pair. Microsoft gave him 2 free copies of Office 2010 professional, a desktop clock, and a useless book on Office 2010 when he attended the launch of Office/Sharepoint 2010. He occasionally uses the SharePoint lanyard they gave him instead of the Ubuntu lanyard for his keys, but feels dirty afterwards. Adobe provided him with a pre-release version of the CS5 Master Collection for evaluation and ultimately provided a full, licensed copy for ongoing testing of educational applications of this admittedly expensive software. Like the Gunnars, if the license expires or they come out with CS6, he'd actually go out and buy it himself. Which is saying something, because he's actually pretty cheap. Any other companies wishing to send him cool things to evaluate, wear, or otherwise adorn his kids are more than welcome to; he promises to disclose it here if he keeps any of the stuff. Finally, because WizIQ is a virtual classroom and learning network provider, Chris, as VP of Marketing, frequently interacts with, seeks out deals with, and directly or indirectly competes with a whole lot of LMS, SIS, and other Education 2.0 companies. In general, he'll limit his reporting about these companies to news that does not impact his relationship with them or with WizIQ. If he reports on them, it's because what they are doing is newsworthy or worth the attention of his readers and not because he's trying to broker some deal, damage competition, or otherwise advance his position in his day job. LMS and SIS companies, along with other online learning communities, are a pretty important part of Ed Tech. If he stops reporting on them completely, there won't be a whole lot left. He'll be sure to call out any overt conflicts of interest if they are unavoidable. Finally, Follett Software Company pays him a little tiny honorarium every month to present on their SIS Voices webinars and to write the occasional blog or discussion thread for them. Since Follett recently bought X2 (maker of an awesome web-based SIS that Chris just happened to have used, served in advisory groups for, and frequently reported on), this is probably also worth disclosing.

Biography

Christopher Dawson

Christopher Dawson grew up in Seattle, back in the days of pre-antitrust Microsoft, coffeeshops owned by something other than Starbucks, and really loud, inarticulate music. He escaped to the right coast in the early 90's and received a degree in Information Systems from Johns Hopkins University. While there, he began a career in health and educational information systems, with a focus on clinical trials and related statistical programming and database modeling. This focus led him to several positions at Johns Hopkins, a couple-year stint in private industry, teaching high school math and technology, and 2 years as the technology director for his local school district. Most recently, he started his own consulting business and is now the Vice President of Marketing for WizIQ, Inc., a virtual classroom and learning network provider. He lives with his wife, five kids (yes, 5), 2 dogs, and a hateful cat in a small town in north-central Massachusetts. Although he is no longer teaching, his roles with WizIQ and ZDNet allow him to continue helping students and teachers add value to education with technology rather than merely adding to the bottom line.
30
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Google joins Apple in banning GrooveShark from its App Market
3shao 20th Sep
@bc3tech great psd. your works are great. so beautiful chanel flap bags chanel rose bags chanel shoulder bags
I am a fan of napster, but only because i get a free subscription to it by being a best buy premier silver rewardzone member. if it wasn't for that, i wouldn't pay a monthly fee just to stream music.
@bc3tech great psd. your works are great. so beautiful chanel flap bags chanel rose bags chanel shoulder bags
0 Votes
+ -
As an independent music producer, I put a lot of time and a GREAT DEAL of money into quality productions. It is very hard for me to continue doing that if there is no return on my investment of time, talent, energy, and money. I am not the guy making billions and I just can't afford for it to be absolutely free for everybody but me to enjoy my music. Goodbye GrooveShark! (the name itself speaks VOLUMES!!!!)
@Vgiman What kind of music do you produce and how do you distribute it? If a radio station liked your music and played it on the air would you be out money? The biggest diffrence between GooveShark and a radio station is that with GrooveShark you choose what songs you hear.
@Greenman76 - Radio stations pay royalties on the music they play. That's the biggest difference. Did you really think that radio stations get all that music for free? Every time a song is played, a fee is payed to a licensing agency such as ASCAP, BMI etc. Radio stations maintain playlists of all the music they air. These playlists are used to determine how often songs are played worldwide. Musicians need to earn money just like everyone else. It's never been easy. It's a misconception that the average musician will somehow magically benefit financially from giving away their music for free on line.
@Greenman76
Same thing I said to people few years ago when they were seeing no value for software and giving high regards for hardware. You can't deliver software by sleeping with hardware. You need to think, design, code and test and deliver and that measn expense and that has to be reimbursed. Likewise music, video etc. can't be delivered by just sleeping with musical instruments, cameras etc. You need talent, presentation and delivery. And not everything will be runaway hit, even a good software or good music/movie can be flop and a stupid concept for software, music, movie can become super sensation.
@Greenman76 more to your point, Grooveshark DOES pay royalty for your music if you sign their liscensing agreement. At least 150 independant recorda labels have a deal with Grooshark and get paid everytime their song is played.
@Rama.net
Your statement about even a stupid idea can become a super hit works for me with iTunes. There are and were other better services out there (AMAZON) not to mention cheaper now that iTunes raised prices by 30 cents per song. Yet itunes is popular not because its good, but because thier players are good and are tied into the software. That's why they put so little into making it user friendly.
@Vgiman, Gshark actually pays good money to producers and IP owners, once they sign a liscensing agreement. In fact, you would be shocked to know how many tier 1 artist upload directly to Grooveshark (Lady Gaga, Snoop Dog and many many more), and get a big revenue share component (north or 60% of all revenue). There is a huge misconception about Grooveshark, mostly paid for by labels. The fact is that they see Gshark as a competitor and are comepeting hard against them. Sign up with Grooveshark, upload your material and you'll get paid everytime your song is played.
@oab999 I do not use Grooveshark and do not know how they work but have a question. Sounds to me like users of the service can make their collections available to other users to listen to. If the actual owner of the material has not signed up with them, do they get paid? My understanding is they don't and their material is not removed unless they complain. If that is the case I take it as saying it's alright to steal unless you get caught but we will pay you if you let us play your music.
@Vgiman Having an audio engineering background I can certainly see where you are coming from. It's no different than the app developers that complain about people pirating their work.
Google should provide an a clear explanation when they reject an app. Not just something about it violating the TOS.

I'm not expecting anything from Apple - I know they reserve the right to reject apps for competitive or any other reason - but I expect more from Google.

The fact that the user can still manually load the app on the device is nice, but it is not a substitute for Google running their marketplace in a transparent manner.
@Trufagus IMHO, I think both Apple and Google will probably soon have to give a very good explanation as to why they boot Grooveshark off. And unless they are right about copyright infrigement (which they are not), than they may have to face the FTC for monopoly practices. As these 2 markets become the premier markets (and they already are), than it won't be so easy as to boot them off for competition...
Expect more?! The sole purpose of the App was piracy, is that not enough?
Or is piracy acceptable in your eyes?
@RandomCake How so? Minishark cannot download the songs just sort of stream them.
@RandomCake You have cut to the point of it rather well. I would add that if someone wants to 'pirate' a resource, they should have to do it themselves by their own wits and not be given an automated tool that would allow any 7 year old to do it. @Petr Perry (below) - It is still listening to them without paying the artist anything. The difference of whether the file is archived permanently or not has (IMNSHO) no real bearing on whether it was fair to the artist. Why I love records -you pay once and can listen forever, none of that streaming crap. But the artist has to be paid something.
@opcom, you make a point, however, the point of Grooveshark is allow 3rd party uploads and actually be paid for it. Grooveshark pays anyone a very high % of all revenue generated when playing your song (revenue generated from ad sales and VIP subs). GShark is actually a tool to allow independant, small artist get paid for their content. In fact, well over 50% of Grooveshark's content is liscensed and generates payments to artists. Go to their web site and you can see this. The only ones that have not wanted to sign a liscensing agreement with Gshark are the 3 recorda labels. The reason is easy, they are trying to control the negotiations, as they have done in the past with everyone (consumers, artists, distributors etc).
@oab999 In fact, well over 50% of Grooveshark's content is liscensed and generates payments to artists.
So not all 100% of the owners of Grooveshark's content are getting paid. What does well over 50% mean, 57%? If so that means 43% of the content is being stolen, how is that right?
@RandomCake Grooveshark has the exact same legal strategy as Youtube, which is operate 3rd party uploaded content, comply with all take down requests, and thus with the DMCA. They are not pirating, they are legal as per the laws of this country. At least as legal as Youtube (and they have plenty of federal judgements in their favor). Want to see who is more DMCA compliant? Search Beatlers on Youtube and then on Grooveshark...than you tell me!
@oab999 Does Grooveshark automatically scan the content to find copywritten material that isn't supposed to be there and remove it as it is my understanding that Youtube does?
Another reason not to buy Apple or Microsoft.
@Peter Perry
Whew, where is Microsoft in this equation? It is google that is joining Apple in banning GrooveShark from its market, not Microsoft banning Grooveshark from Google's market. With this simple statement you lost credibility and showed your fanboism and ignorance at the same time.
@Rama.NET True but it's not like anybody has ever questioned his fanboism and ignorance in the past, they have always been obvious happy
OK interesting article Christopher, but you said "the company clearly has plenty of reasons to say goodbye to GrooveShark. In fact, like it or not, so do consumers." and you didn't say why consumers "has plenty of reasons to say goodbye to GrooveShark". Why, is it defective? Consumers always want something for nothing..
@opcom Good point!
Grooveshark doesn't allow me to download anything, though, and I use it to hear some music I would _never_ -let me repeat that for you- _never_ buy just because I liked one track from some artist (never have).

On the other hand, with programs like Grooveshark I can theoretically hear a whole album (if it's available), and make the decision to buy or not (and I have indeed bought whole albums based on that practice).

The industry doesn't care and they always cry "think of the artists," but they?ve been screwing artists and fans out of money for decades; they?re just angry that fans have figured out a way around them, nevermind the many musicians who now communicate and sell directly to fans.

Finally, this misses the other obvious point: ?listening? doesn?t equal ?not owning.?

I _own_ nearly all the music I actually listen to on Grooveshark; it's just sometimes easier to use when I don't have other means of hearing music.

No, Grooveshark is not the music industry's problem; try again.
@CellophaneSound You don't own the music you hear on the local radio station either but that has nothing to do with this since the artists/labels that own the rights to those songs do get paid.
I don?t like that,but you still can go to the official page.I don?t see the problem with Grooveshark.It's like youtube and in Youtube you can watch fans channels with videos they don't own.But of course,Youtube belongs to Google and GS doesn't.
@anto31
Maybe they'll buy it!

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix
ie8 fix