Google kicks GrooveShark out of the Android Market

[+Frank B. Subscriber²]

Google kicks GrooveShark out of the Android Market

The controversial GrooveShark music streaming service is getting the cold shoulder from mobile platform vendors. GrooveShark's mobile music streaming application, which was kicked out of Apple's App Store last year, has recently received the same treatment from Google. GrooveShark for Android was removed from the Android Market this week and is no longer available through the platform's official application delivery channel.

GrooveShark's mobile software won't be as easily discoverable or convenient to install as it once was, but the beat will go on despite banishment from the mobile software storefronts. The GrooveShark for Android application is still readily available from the company's website and can be installed on any Android device that allows sideloading. The iPhone version is also similarly available, though only installable on jailbroken devices.

GrooveShark allows users to upload media content and play media uploaded by other users. The company behind the service has faced litigation from major recording labels in the past and has negotiated licensing deals with some. EMI, for example, dropped a lawsuit against GrooveShark in 2009 after reaching a settlement agreement which included licensing terms that granted GrooveShark access to EMI's catalog.

Although GrooveShark's executives contend that their service operates within the boundaries of copyright law, that's not entirely clear. Universal Music Group is still currently engaged in litigation against GrooveShark, in what one inside industry source described as a relentless "legal jihad" against the streaming service.

In a statement to TechCrunch, GrooveShark claims that pressure from the recording industry was what compelled Apple and Google to stop distributing the GrooveShark application. The company believes that there is no defensible basis for the removal of their application in Google's Android Market policies. In the statement, GrooveShark compares its own service to YouTube and argues that that they are entitled to stream user-contributed content as long as they continue complying with DMCA takedown notices.

When we briefly discussed the matter with the RIAA via e-mail, the organization declined to comment or confirm playing a role in the application blockage.

It's worth noting that Google is currently facing scrutiny from Congress over its handling of sensitive copyright issues, particularly the rampant use of AdWords advertising campaigns on piracy websites. Google could be clamping down GrooveShark in response to the pressure from its Congressional inquisitors.

Source: Ars Technica

[Shock Doc]

Not cool Google...

[Lunfai]

Not cool Google...

I love Grooveshark, but I can see why record labels may hate the service, you can basically listen to any song you want (some of the rarer ones, you can upload yourself). I' still use it though, and unless it shuts down, I'm going to keep using it :)

[Shock Doc]

I love Grooveshark, but I can see why record labels may hate the service, you can basically listen to any song you want (some of the rarer ones, you can upload yourself). I' still use it though, and unless it shuts down, I'm going to keep using it :)

I guess you could still go to Grooveshark.com in the browser and listen there?

[Lunfai]

I guess you could still go to Grooveshark.com in the browser and listen there?

Oh I still have the $2.99 subscription for listening on my iPhone. I've jail broken it purposely for this, I love it! :)

I always use the browser as well, it's like my home page ^^

[DukeEsquire]

Yeah I'm not surprised by this.

I don't really see how it's any different than any other file sharing service. People upload their MP3s and anyone on Grooveshark can listen and/or download them.

This is different than p2p how?

[Rudie32]

If you go to the grooveshark mobile page (After you sign in) scan the barcode and it will download the apk from a website vs. the android market.

[Subject Delta]

Disappointing for sure, I am not a fan of censorship. Hopefully it will be allowed to return once the legal issues are resolved.

[dnast]

I never knew the music itself was user uploaded (doh!). I guess it makes sense that Google decided to remove it.

[DrunkenBeard]

Yeah I'm not surprised by this.

I don't really see how it's any different than any other file sharing service. People upload their MP3s and anyone on Grooveshark can listen and/or download them.

This is different than p2p how?

1) P2P isn't illegal

2) This had *NOTHING* to do with P2P

3) Like they said it's exactly like Youtube, only with audio instead of video.

[PyX]

Ahh, the joy of having an open platform :)

If only Apple followed Google's traces about this.

Oh wait...

[still1]

Yeah I'm not surprised by this.

I don't really see how it's any different than any other file sharing service. People upload their MP3s and anyone on Grooveshark can listen and/or download them.

This is different than p2p how?

You cant download user uploaded music. Also the article says groove shark is still in its legal boundary and the only reason the app was removed was the pressure from the music industry.

[DukeEsquire]

You cant download user uploaded music. Also the article says groove shark is still in its legal boundary and the only reason the app was removed was the pressure from the music industry.

You sure? I've used the iPhone cydia app and you can definitely download music.

[XIII]

Good thing I dropped Android. Google starts sounding more and more evil these days.

[Saint Shiv]

You sure? I've used the iPhone cydia app and you can definitely download music.

100% positive, you can cache music... so I guess you can try to hack your cache? Otherwise, nope

[Brian Jackson]

I agree with their defense in that it's not much different than YouTube. I can listen to any song I want on YouTube, so why not Grooveshark?

[dnast]

Um...YouTube regularly mutes/deletes videos with copyrighted material in them. Sure you can still find these songs because of the massive popularity of YouTube, but you can't really say it's nearly the same as Grooveshark.

I saw a recent article about the amount of video that gets uploaded to YouTube these days but can't find it anymore...so - looking at articles from last year, even then users were uploading 35 hours of video per minute. With that amount of content of course things slip through.

The difference between YouTube and Grooveshark is that YouTube's purpose is simply for people to share videos they've made even if copyrighted content sometimes finds it way on there, while Grooveshark is pretty much pointless without users sharing their collections of others' work.

Sure I have the Grooveshark app installed on my phone, but I'm not going to sit here and pretend that there's no reason why a company as prominent as Google would try to avoid supporting something like this.

[LiquidSolstice]

You know, I never really could think of a non-piracy reason to want to sideload apps until now.

The apk is still downloadable, nothing to really get worked up about.

[th3rEsa]

The funny aspect here is that TinyShark (free Grooveshark streaming app) is still available in the Market ... :)