The Day the Music Died: A Grooveshark Retrospective

Justin Pot 02-05-2015

Grooveshark is dead. Killed after 10 years by record labels baying for blood.

The music streaming service famously offered free streaming of seemingly every song, and infamously did so without licenses. It’s kind of surprising the site stayed online as long as it did – it took until April 30, 2015 for the site to be taken offline entirely Tesla Energy Is Live, Grooveshark Is Dead, Microsoft Guesses Your Age, & More... [Tech News Digest] Tesla Energy lives, Grooveshark dies, Microsoft knows how old you are, Night Terrors invades your home, download P.T. from PlayStation Store, and elders react (badly) to Mortal Kombat X. Read More , after nearly a decade of controversy.

As of now, would-be users are treated to a message instead of music:

We failed to secure licenses from rights holders for the vast amount of music on the service. That was wrong. We apologize. Without reservation. – message on the Grooveshark.com homepage

It’s quite a statement, considering the history of the company. As recently as 2012, its CEO argued all music should be free, suggesting artists focus on concert revenue instead:

It’s clear that in ten years, the incentives are going to align so that music should be free, because it’s going to sell everywhere else. -Grooveshark CEO Sam Tarantino

Well, it’s now 2015 and the streaming generation is well established The End of Ownership: Netflix, Spotify, and The Streaming Generation Streaming media is convenient, but you're giving up something important: ownership of digital media. Read More , but it’s services like Pandora and Rdio – both of whom pay royalties to artist and labels Why Taylor Swift Is Wrong About Spotify In the past week Taylor Swift has pulled her music from Spotify, inspired countless song-pun laden headlines and reignited the debate about streaming music services. Read More  – that are leading the pack.

How did Grooveshark stay alive so long? And what does its closure mean for users? Let’s take a look.

What Was Grooveshark?

In its most recent incarnation, Grooveshark was a website offering free streaming music. You could head to the site, search for any artist, album or track, and basically start playing what you wanted right away.

The Day the Music Died: A Grooveshark Retrospective grooveshark my music page

A mobile app was briefly available, but ultimately removed from both Apple’s App Store and Google Play. To get around these restrictions, Grooveshark created an HTML5 version of their site that mobile users could open in any browser.

The Day the Music Died: A Grooveshark Retrospective 2012 09 20 10

There was a lot to like about Grooveshark. You could play whatever songs you wanted, including a lot of stuff not offered on other streaming services. If you couldn’t find a particular song, but had it on your computer, you could upload it – meaning Grooveshark was a sort of YouTube for music.

Why Did Grooveshark Shut Down?

Of course, in its early days, YouTube itself was full of pirated content – something that prompted more than a few lawsuits. This is why YouTube today has a filter to catch unauthorized uploads of protected movies and TV shows, along with a number of other (controversial) tools for rights holders to remove videos from the site.


Grooveshark didn’t implement anything like this. If a record company specifically requested a recording be taken down, they’d comply – all that’s necessary under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DCMA).

But once music was taken down, it would reappear on the site quickly – sometimes within hours. Grooveshark argued it was the users that were re-uploading the music, and that it wasn’t Grooveshark’s responsibility to take the music down again without another takedown request. This meant that, for record companies, keeping their music off of Grooveshark meant playing a neverending game of whack-a-mole.

This was the status quo for a long time, until internal emails revealed at least some Grooveshark staff were uploading music themselves.

Basically, Grooveshark shut down because it was a streaming piracy service. That’s a claim Grooveshark denied for a long time, but now makes explicit in the mea culpa published on its home page.

If That’s True, Why Didn’t Grooveshark Die Sooner?

That’s a good question. The answer is simple, according to music industry consultant Mark Mulligan.

“Good lawyers, basically,” Mulligan told The Atlantic, adding that it took the labels “time to be able to make the case.” He added:

Ultimately, they were always going to get there, but the complexity of copyright law almost always means that these cases can take a huge amount of time. -Mark Mulligan

Grooveshark was very good at exploiting the gray areas in the law – and the legal system’s endless series of appeals – in order to stay online. But that couldn’t possibly last forever.

So What Happens to the Users?

Basically, they’re screwed. Grooveshark is completely gone, and it’s not coming back. The record labels now own the service, and it’s highly unlikely they’ll bring it back in any form that resembles what the site was – if Jay Z’s Tidal is any indication, the industry sucks at running streaming sites Why Jay Z's Tidal Music Streaming Service is Doomed to Fail Jay Z recently relaunched Tidal, the music streaming service he acquired for $56 million. Tidal has 99 problems, and the pitch is one. Read More .


However, if you were a longtime Grooveshark user, it might be possible to get at least something back. GrooveBackup [Broken URL Removed] aims to provide you access to your playlists, but reports of this working are mixed at best.

Assuming you haven’t cleared your browser’s cache in a while though, there’s another thing you can try:

What Did Early Grooveshark Look Like?

MakeUseOf profiled Grooveshark way back in 2008 Grooveshark - Free Legal Online Music Read More , and it looked very different back then, to say the least.

The Day the Music Died: A Grooveshark Retrospective grooveshark221

Users needed to download a piece of software before they could play music, and even email a Grooveshark employee directly before they could get access to the service.

At the time, Grooveshark wasn’t just for streaming songs: you could actually buy a “used copy” of an MP3 from another Grooveshark user (if you did, the MP3 would be deleted from the other user’s computer).

The Day the Music Died: A Grooveshark Retrospective playlist

Naturally, for most major labels, Grooveshark had no permission to do this, whatsoever, as Chris Morrison of VentureBeat explained at the time.

Although users are only supposed to share songs by artists from the small records on the company’s list, that’s an unrealistic expectation at best, as there’s no way to automatically filter content.

This would be the pattern of Grooveshark for most of its existence. The site ultimately abandoned the idea of selling used MP3s without permission from rights holders, focusing instead of offering streams of music without permission from rights holders.

What Will You Replace Grooveshark With?

Longtime Grooveshark users will clearly miss the site, but anyone surprised by its passing clearly wasn’t paying attention. The writing has been on the wall for Grooveshark for a while now.

As such, I bet most of you found alternatives a long time ago – and I want to know which services you plan on using now that the inevitable has happened. Potential replacements for Grooveshark include Spotify, Rdio, and even YouTube, but I want to know what hidden gems you guys might know about. Let’s talk!

Related topics: Grooveshark, MP3, Rdio, Spotify, YouTube.

Affiliate Disclosure: By buying the products we recommend, you help keep the site alive. Read more.

Whatsapp Pinterest

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. Anonymous
    October 28, 2015 at 5:28 pm

    A new music streaming service called urRadio was launched in late March. urRadio combines streaming music and what you loved about Radio DJs (broadcasting, group chatting, sharing music and more!). Still testing this new music platform and like it so far. Their catalogue is not as big as Grooveshark's but hopefully it should be improved by the end of this year along with some enhancements and new features for DJs.

    • Anonymous
      October 31, 2015 at 10:42 am

      Hi Les Voyageurs. Were you a folk deejay with that name on Grooveshark? I can't find your station on urRadio.

      • Anonymous
        October 31, 2015 at 4:00 pm

        Hey Mike. Indeed we did broadcast "Folk & Beyond" on Grooveshark for many years and now on urRadio. Our pseudo is: LESVOYAGEURS and we are on air atm. Cheers!

        • Anonymous
          October 31, 2015 at 6:01 pm

          Thank you! I have always liked your station and was the biggest reason I missed Grooveshark.

        • Anonymous
          October 31, 2015 at 11:55 pm

          Hey Mike! You are most welcome. Hope you will enjoy our new selection. Many good vibes your way and see you soon on urRadio.

  2. Anonymous
    June 27, 2015 at 8:17 pm

    There is a new streaming service that allows to import your "lost" GrooveShark playlists into it and start listening almost immediately. Import process is very fast and takes a couple of seconds.


    • Anonymous
      August 2, 2015 at 9:04 pm

      You just saved me years of collecting music and playlists that I liked to listen to. I honestly can't even tell you just how happy you just made me. This is amazing!

    • Justin Pot
      August 3, 2015 at 3:01 pm

      Seems like it uses YouTube for its music source, but otherwise works a lot like Grooveshark. Interesting.

  3. Sarah Al Akkad (?????????)
    June 1, 2015 at 9:20 am

    People keep saying Spotify as if everyone in the world lives in the US. Spotify isn't available in Japan (nor are Pandora or rdio). What am I supposed to do then? Grooveshark was my only to discover what was popular at the time (I had been using it for about 7 years now) I have to dig deeper.

  4. anonymous
    May 25, 2015 at 2:41 am

    Honestly, I think spotify is cool, but i miss how I could just type in grooveshark.com and it would remember all the songs i had bookmarked without me having to log in. And spotify has no where near as many songs, grooveshark had many songs from pretty much every band in the world and it was rare for a band to "not exist" on the site, but now I go to spotify, and bands like "The Legion of Doom" among other bands apparently "do not exist" or if i can find the band, all the songs are crappy knock-offs done by "tribute bands" or "live performances" and I would rather hear the real band and if i want to hear it "live" then i will go to a concert myself.

    • Justin Pot
      May 25, 2015 at 2:41 pm

      Grooveshark was only able to pull that off because they didn't both to ask permission to put the songs on the site. I'll admit it's nice for the user, but it's not ideal for artists.

  5. Gleeren
    May 23, 2015 at 2:47 pm

    I do not like the music industry's attempt to squeeze every penny out of us for every song every created. I understand getting compensated when you work really hard and that should always be the case but when the industry is a billion dollar business to destroy something groove shark was about you can't do this because we said no.

    That stated I am very disappointed in Grooveshark. They always stated that they were in it for the music lovers, if that was the case then why not come to some kind of compromise with the industry. I would completely understand if they explained that in order to stay afloat even the basic service would be $10.00 a month. Why think "even for a second" that your were going to win against an entity as powerful as the music industry.

    I have been looking for a week now to find something even close to Grooveshark, not possible.

    • Justin Pot
      May 25, 2015 at 2:43 pm

      I don't think they had much of a choice to compromise, they were very clearly in the wrong and the music industry had every right to take them down. Nothing close to it will ever exist again, unless some company manages to get the rights to most of earth's music.

  6. Danielle
    May 14, 2015 at 2:55 am

    Very interesting Grooveshark retrospective Justin!
    If you feel like it, you might join the Grooveshark Forum to get some feedback.
    Maybe all hope is not lost after all! ;-)
    All the best,

  7. Sir Gib
    May 13, 2015 at 11:32 am

    Really liked Groveshark, quite a shock when it dispappeared the other week:( HAd listenend for free about 3 years, was 1 of the paying members the last year. An idea for a revival would be to have interested music lovers listen & build playlists for free for a set amount of time, say 1 month. After that, an advisory note of "Would you like to be a member? Here's how!" should pop up upon entering the site with the correct username & password. After another month a final adivsory note "Your trial time is soon over - become a full member by [date]. After this, your usernamne, account & playlists will be removed". Of course 1 could start afresh by joining for free as a new member, & have copied the playlists, but most people are decent about these things in the end.

    • Justin Pot
      May 13, 2015 at 3:19 pm

      Spotify is really similar in some ways, and offers an unlimited free trial with ads. Not sure if anything better is likely to come along, but you can also check out Rdio if Spotify isn't right for you.

  8. bnr
    May 7, 2015 at 9:16 pm

    I will miss grooveshark very much... I used to only listen to classical music when I was a kid... And with 17 I began with back metal too... I used to download... When I discovered groovesharck, as I couldn't stand spotify after the first advert destoid my listening session, I began to search for new music and discovered electronical music... And other weird stuff. Most of my follows had less than 100 listners... There was this band for which I was the only follower! I never uploaded... Wasn't even sure I could, not being a band myself. I hope I can find another site, I prefer this to the mule, so much better to discover new musicians.

    • Justin Pot
      May 7, 2015 at 11:22 pm

      If you want to discover independent musicians, I recommend checking out Bandcamp. There's a lot to explore on that site.

  9. Daniel
    May 5, 2015 at 5:50 pm

    I looked into it and found this: http://bgr.com/2015/05/05/grooveshark-is-back-online/
    Supposedly "Shark" and some colleagues are trying to completely restore Grooveshark, but right now only have parts of it. I guess we'll just have to wait and see what the future holds for Grooveshark.

    • Justin Pot
      May 5, 2015 at 9:38 pm

      Yeah, we're watching this closely. Should be interesting...

    • Justin Pot
      May 13, 2015 at 3:19 pm

      Update: this doesn't seem to be affiliated with Grooveshark in any way. It's a search engine for file sharing sites.

  10. Mikee
    May 5, 2015 at 3:17 pm

    its just like the torrent sites, they will always find another way. please bring grooveshark back

    • Justin Pot
      May 5, 2015 at 9:38 pm

      I'm not so sure. Offering streaming music is pretty different, in terms of cost, than offering magnet links. Whoever sets up an alternative system is going to need some cash on hand – and having cash on hand will make you a target pretty quickly.

      Then again, there are plenty of streaming sites with pirated video out there, so maybe I'm totally wrong.

  11. Shane Plank
    May 5, 2015 at 3:12 pm

    We all need to start campaigns in our own communities and watch it spread throughout music lovers everywhere. It shall be called the Save the Shark campaign

  12. Tom
    May 5, 2015 at 2:53 am

    I will miss Grooveshark. I only listened to music for myself and never uploaded a thing. To my friends at Grooveshark, I am sure we will see you again in some form or fashion. You have a lot of fans in the cyberworld and the genie is well out of the bottle.

    • Justin Pot
      May 5, 2015 at 1:29 pm

      It will be interesting to see what the members of the team do next, I have a feeling this isn't the end.

  13. Thewarsword
    May 5, 2015 at 12:22 am

    Grooveshark cared about their customers and innovated, and brought services without spoiling the experiences for the customer.

    Meanwhile, Spotify and pandora can't seem to provide half the value, features, customer service, and with more ad revenue (if they aren't making more with those intrusive ads that ruin my experience then another thing they should'vshould've learned from GS) then GS.

    GS was clearly a marvel and built a community that no other company I Know of, let alone streaming service could match.

    From my perspective, they (labels) don't care about my experience, just my cash. Then they want to know why everyone turns to GS and torrents for free music?

    Thanks for the article and reading my comment. I like this website.

    • Justin Pot
      May 5, 2015 at 1:29 pm

      If you don't like the labels, don't steal their music – stop listening to it. There are plenty of musicians out there who do care about your experience, many of whom share their music free of charge on sites like Bandcamp.

  14. Thewarsword
    May 5, 2015 at 12:14 am

    I like pandora's service...Spotify is only good when I want to listen on my ps4.

    Looking at what grooveshark accomplished I realized it never was about it being free.

    Grooveshark didn'tt have ads that were overly annoying, added radio like pandora, broadcasts by my fellow sharks, I could say I really loved this song, or I didn't love that song for this station. I had a voice and a community.

    I never paid for grooveshark, but if they had asked like Wikipedia asks I would've found the money without asking any questions.

    They let it be free, helped me find music I can't find anywhere else...added features reguarlly, let me make playlists...and with me not paying a dime, no ads to ruin my experience, and providing a community and unique service... and here pandora and Spotify and beats... all they want is my 10 dollars a month for half the quality?! Are you kidding me?

    Grooveshark did a lot more then these larger companies could with less resources. That whole last message on their site tells me they cared about my experience even though they got shut down.

    They didn'didn't blame the labels, or compete with Spotify in that last message. They just wanted me, the nonnon-payment customer, to be happy. Holy shit, business around the world should learn from this.

    Am I only person outraged by this loss? Angry that a company gave a damn and no one else cared anything other then the money?

    What GS did was wrong, and I wish it turned out differently.

    Thanks for the article. Thanks for the read.

    • Justin Pot
      May 5, 2015 at 1:27 pm

      There really was a lot to like about Grooveshark, it's true, I hope other companies are paying attention.

      I'd add one other point to yours, though: it's easy to keep ads to a minimum if you're not paying for the content shown. And there are sites that let users uploading and share music, and build a community, just without the protected works.

  15. Mateus
    May 4, 2015 at 10:02 pm

    This was very bad news. The Grooveshark was actually a great service to music fans, allowing access to music from all over the planet and that are outside the mainstream, including the labels.

    Lose the public, but also lose the artists who had an excellent tool to democratize public access to their works and make them earn sense.

    I would love to get the data of my playlists. For years I researched a lot of good stuff that stood there. To all who felt wronged, sign: https://www.change.org/p/grooveshark-allow-users-to-backup-their-playlists

    I'm still researching how best replacement for Grooveshark. For now, what seems to be closest is the http://www.deezer.com.

    • Justin Pot
      May 5, 2015 at 1:18 pm

      I agree that artists have a lot to gain by giving their audience easy access to their work, and I'm sure many took advantage of that. Some still will, using platforms that also filter out protected information.

      I would point to SoundCloud and BandCamp as sites that all sorts of independent artists are using to offer free streams of their music, and in many cases even free downloads. You won't find the big-label stuff there, but there's some great music to be found if you take the time to look.

    • Mateus
      May 6, 2015 at 2:42 pm

      Good tips, Justin!
      But I enjoy very much sounds from Latin America, Africa and East, like Bi Kidude, Hamza El Din, Kélétigui Diabaté, Toumani Diabaté, Zakir Hussain, Hariprasad Chaurasia, Manu Dibango, Giovanni Hidalgo, Mercedes Sosa, Babatunde Olatunji, Egberto Gismonti, Hermeto Pascoal, Nana Vasconcelos, among many others. And unfortunately, it is very hard to hear them for free and even more so their albums.
      But thanks anyway and congratulations for this work!

  16. Angel
    May 4, 2015 at 6:40 pm

    I'm wondering if anyone has found another site that will let you broadcast like GS did.

    • Justin Pot
      May 5, 2015 at 1:13 pm

      I'm not familiar with this broadcasting feature, how did it work? I could look for something for you.

    • Angel
      May 7, 2015 at 2:02 pm

      Broadcasting would let you be the DJ. You start the broadcast, choose the name of it, the songs it played, whether you wanted to allow chat or not (it had a chat feature for in the BC), if you wanted to appoint someone as your "special guest" (which was basically chat cop - they could ban someone if they got too unruly). It was a nice feature. I used to listen to one every day at work, 80s - Best of, that had an awesome selection and great regulars. You could chat with people if you wanted to, request certain songs be played (which were then upvoted by others who wanted to hear it), and if the DJ approved it, it became part of the queue that day.

    • Justin Pot
      May 7, 2015 at 2:16 pm

      That sounds amazing, I wish I'd found this before the site was shut down.

  17. John C
    May 4, 2015 at 4:58 am

    I think it's interesting that Grooveshark being forced into making an HTML5 site due to getting shut out of the app stores means that, now, all the users are getting their data out even with the site shutdown. Web standards are pretty cool!

    • Justin Pot
      May 4, 2015 at 2:30 pm

      Web standards are amazing, this is a great footnote to this entire story.

  18. Emma
    May 4, 2015 at 4:05 am

    Re: Groovebackup: the actual URL just leads back to the takedown message right now, BUT if you google groovebackup and click on the cached page, you can still access it. That's how I got my playlists back, big relief.

    • Justin Pot
      May 4, 2015 at 2:10 pm

      It's a shame it was taken down, that was useful for music fans. Seems like a dumb move.

    • Ivan
      May 4, 2015 at 3:41 pm

      Im trying but nothing happens :(

    • Eugene
      May 7, 2015 at 3:54 pm

      Thanks Emma! I have recovered all my playlists using from the cached view, which loaded groovebackup.com/home.

  19. Book
    May 4, 2015 at 3:22 am

    i used Grooveshark faithfully for 10 years and even won tickets to VooDoo Fest in New Orleans with the service . Amazing right It served me well it was my one excuse for avoiding spotify and pandora (the more common services)

    • Justin Pot
      May 4, 2015 at 2:22 pm

      Have you thought about which service to check out now that Grooveshark is gone?

  20. Rob Banks
    May 3, 2015 at 10:11 pm

    The RIAA strikes again. The DMCA not only stops sharing sites, it prohibits new artists from putting their content online for free, though deals with Microsoft etal.

    Now a good artist who may offer brilliant new music will never be heard unless some fat lazy ass well fed record A and R guy feels like actually listening to new sources.

    What are the odds of that? Practically 0.

    Artists should be allowed to put their own music online with the software they purchase and not be harassed by a cabal of record label executives, who fear competition.

    • Justin Pot
      May 4, 2015 at 12:10 am

      Dood artists who just want to be heard are free to upload their music to sites like SoundCloud. Many of them do; some make careers out of it.

      Grooveshark could have behaved like Soundcloud, giving independent artists a place to show off their work while stopping users from uploading protected work. They didn't, because they thought having that work without a license would help them attract listeners.

  21. GM
    May 3, 2015 at 6:24 pm

    Good news... you can still retrieve your playlists.
    Go to audiosplitter.fm and sign up, then click on the Grooveshark logo in the header and you'll be prompted to type in your GS email address and after a few minutes a dropdown menu will appear with...guess what...all of your GS playlists which you can then import one at a time.

    • Justin Pot
      May 3, 2015 at 7:02 pm

      That's pretty cool, I'll have to check this out.

    • Ivan
      May 4, 2015 at 3:50 pm

      I fount this message:

      Hi ogakors,
      Due to circumstances beyond our control, the Grooveshark Playlist Import feature is temporarily unavailable. Please bear with us, we're working hard to solve the problem, and we'll let you know when it's back online.

    • Ivan
      May 4, 2015 at 4:09 pm

      I've already follow your steps and I could only recovered 24 songs, from different playlists that I've use to have. Is it normal? How can I get back all of my songs?

  22. Ivan
    May 3, 2015 at 3:31 pm

    Shit! How can i get back all my playlists..! and even worst I begun to pay the service this month , already 18 euros are gone for this website and no one will give me back that money!

    • Justin Pot
      May 4, 2015 at 2:22 pm

      There's a few tips for grabbing your playlists above, but you gotta be fast about it.

  23. ron
    May 3, 2015 at 3:26 am

    I hope they (the record companies) just want the software for Apples upcoming music service! I liked the Grooveshark interface better than the others (Spotify, Google Play, etc).

    • Justin Pot
      May 3, 2015 at 7:01 pm

      Yeah, Grooveshark did a lot of things right in terms of UI, it's sad to see it go from that perspective.

  24. Arpit Kharbanda
    May 3, 2015 at 2:55 am

    I think SoundCloud is good.

    • Justin Pot
      May 3, 2015 at 6:59 pm

      I love SoundCloud, there's a lot of great music there to explore.

  25. Hildegerd
    May 2, 2015 at 6:22 pm

    Too bad Grooveshark is down, but, but things always ends.

    • Connie
      May 2, 2015 at 8:42 pm

      Well, I'm computer dumb. I had a number of Playlists---so isn't that the same as downloading the songs, because I did NOT share the music, but I did "download" them to my playlists, so wasn't I downloading then?

    • Hildegerd
      May 3, 2015 at 6:34 pm

      I have no idea, since I didn't do that.

    • Justin Pot
      May 3, 2015 at 6:59 pm

      Connie: you'd be downloading the list of songs, not the songs themselves.

    • James Edward Crowley Maximus Meridius
      May 5, 2015 at 2:01 pm

      yeah true i wish they will be another website like grooveshark that will replace one day.

  26. Connie
    May 2, 2015 at 5:44 pm

    I would be afraid to even get a "copy" of my playlists so I could go on another legal site to rebuild. I'd be afraid that whoever shut Grooveshark down could sue just for trying to get access to the playlists for none other than building new playlists elsewhere.

    • Justin Pot
      May 2, 2015 at 8:31 pm

      There's not really any risk of that happening, Connie – you never downloaded music from them, so you never really broke the law. You're fine.

  27. Oscar
    May 2, 2015 at 5:24 pm

    I moved to spotify a few months back. I didn't foresee this happening this quick, but like it was indicated above , it was just a matter of time.

    • Justin Pot
      May 3, 2015 at 7:00 pm

      Yep, only a matter of time. Spotify seems to be doing things the right way, though, users and the industry are both pretty happy with it I think.

  28. Paul R
    May 2, 2015 at 5:06 pm

    I like spotify's model. They legally allow you to play music--it just doesn't become part of your own collection that you can have when you aren't logged in to Spotify. They do make payments to the rights holders of the music. They have paid $2 billion for the music they play. I actually prefer listening to music there, rather than youtube, as Spotifiy does make payments.

    I realize that those payments aren't much at all--but that is due to the record companies and the economics of the music industry; that isn't Spotify's fault.

    They don't have as much music as youtube does, but any more, I only go to youtube for videos, or for rare or concert footage. For listening to most music, spotify is just fine.

    • Justin Pot
      May 3, 2015 at 7:00 pm

      Yep, there's a lot to like about Spotify's model for consumers. As for artists getting paid: that needs to be worked out. But anyone who pays for Spotify shouldn't feel guilty about anything.

    • Love music
      May 7, 2015 at 2:33 pm

      The majors insist on "the artist being paid", hiding that they give them almost nothing, keeping the money for themselves ! With over-the-internet music, the majors are not needed any more, that's why they are so aggressive to try to lock the market..

    • Justin Pot
      May 7, 2015 at 4:02 pm

      So stop listening to anything made by the majors; support independent artists. Plenty of them offer free streaming of their songs, and DRM-free MP3s to purchase. If you want change, ignore what the major labels put out entirely.

  29. Howard Pearce
    May 2, 2015 at 4:45 pm

    Copyrights are one of those intellectual property rights enforced in various countries.

    Such agreements/arrangements should be enforced with a contract/agreement when you buy a product .... similar to software, maybe.