The title is misleading. Grooveshark has nothing against the music industry and never had.<p>They have something against vendors (like Google and Apple) prematurely pulling out their app from their respective markets/stores because of their ignorance of the law.
I have used Grooveshark for a while now and I do enjoy what they have on offer. It's companies like Grooveshark that the record industry need. If they are doing what they say they are doing then they contribute heavily to the music economy.<p>I look at the actions of Google in two ways, they have either received a lot of complaints from the governing body and their hand was forced <i>or</i> they really are releasing their own cloud music store and they are getting rid of potential competitors.<p>I hope its the first reason as I really like Google and their ethics.<p>I have had personal dealings with the music industry though and how licenses work. In some cases they do not even check the legality of a music provider and presume they are acting illegally because their business model looks illegal. They are going against their own policy of innovation to get them out the mess they are in.<p>I hate to say it but I think if/when Apple/Google release their own version of the cloud music player, the rest are screwed anyway. They will find some way of making the software so integrated with their phones that it's pointless to use any 3rd party software like Spotify or Grooveshark.
Grooveshark did not make a stand against the music industry. They made a stand against Google and the RIAA. Seems like Google is afraid of the RIAA and just drops anything from the store the RIAA doesn't like.
I can see why Apple is against Grooveshark...people buy less music. I've been using Grooveshark for the last 5 months and went from buying about $20 worth of music a month to maybe $2-3.
I'm curious what Grooveshark does that allows it to be legal, where as p2p networks, youtube, megavideo, etc. routinely have to take down their copyrighted content. Anyone know?