Grooveshark, first LEGAL P2P music service?

Written By Jared Moya

January 23, 2007 | 8 Comments

Though not yet available, Grooveshark claims to be a new P2P music-sharing community that will compensate both copyright holders and members who participate in the community.

Grooveshark will be a P2P music file-sharing community that will broker music transactions between members. It will be charging for the songs exchanged between members on the site, Grooveshark will compensate copyright holders and users while providing the convenience and selection of P2P file-sharing in an online music community. All Grooveshark files will be DRM-free, allowing users to play the songs they purchase on any PC or portable digital music player.

Grooveshark will supposedly combine the best of P2P file-sharing and online music download sites into one convenient service. Users will be able to browse songs uploaded by other members and then pay to download these DRM-free MP3 files.

Songs will vary in price, but none will cost more than 99 cents. Grooveshark will then pay the appropriate royalties to music copyright holders by taking commissions from users’ transactions and then also compensate users with free music for community participation such as uploading songs, fixing song tags, flagging unwanted files or reviewing music. Members will be rewarded based on their level of contribution to
the Grooveshark community.

“Our bottom line is value. By bringing the convenience and selection of a peer-to-peer network together with the recommendation power of a community of friends — all the while removing DRM — we can generate revenue to compensate both copyright holders and users,” said Sam Tarantino, 20-year-old founder and CEO of Escape Media Group, the parent company of Grooveshark.

Grooveshark will function much like other popular P2P file exchanges. Members can offer their music library for sale through Grooveshark and discover and share new music with other members (only DRM-free MP# or .OGG files).

What will set Grooveshark part from other P2P services, both legal and illegal, is that it will broker music transactions by charging up to 99 cents for each song downloaded and use those proceeds to pay royalties to the copyright holders and reward members for community participation.

“Much of the success of P2P networks can be amplified by a community aspect — allowing users to find someone with similar musical tastes and sample songs from their collection to find new artists or rare and unique songs and genres,” said Tarantino. “By harnessing the power of user-generated content, Grooveshark can bring together online community elements, compensate artists and users and provide customers with control over their music by eliminating unfair DRM schemes,” he added.

Because all Grooveshark files are DRM-free MP3s, they can be played on any computer or digital music player, so users no longer risk losing the ability to play songs in their collection if they wish a different PC or portable digital music device

Grooveshark is expected to roll out in the first quarter of 2007(?), and its prospects for success look quite good.

What I find particularly fascinating is that if its true, if one can really legally upload their music to the service, is that a person can make some money off of their music library or potentially leverage it to add to it.

Grooveshark, and again I’m still kind of skeptical that the RIAA will embrace its method of royalty collection, could quite possibly be the standard for digital music downloads in the future.

digg_url = ‘http://digg.com/music/Grooveshark_first_LEGAL_P2P_music_service’;

SOULXTC: “walkin’ the streets of P2P”

Jared Moya
I've been interested in P2P since the early, high-flying days of Napster and KaZaA. I believe that analog copyright laws are ill-suited to the digital age, and that art and culture shouldn't be subject to the whims of international entertainment industry conglomerates. Twitter | Google Plus

@AussieMatt......Things have changed since 2004 the record labels are not nearly as in control of their product as they once were. Mabye they will take a "if you can't beat them you might as well join them" approach to p2p and losen their grip on how they demand companies set pricing and availability online. Although like you I also doubt that will happen but they are just slitting their own throat even more if they don't. It is a no win situation for them. The lawsuits are not working the scare tactics are not working the "education" of kids is not working and p2p of all kinds is growing....not diminishing....despite the best efforts of the industry to thwart it. So they eventually are going to have to come up with a plan to compete with p2p. If they don't they just will lose more and more control over a product at one time was tightly controlled by the industry.

AussieMatt

Peer Impact pitched this exact model to the record lables back in 2004 and the record lables flatly rejected it . The Major lablels and the independants do not want this model at the moment even if its the right one . http://www.peerimpact.com

SpocksBrainOnDrugs

So would uploaders be advertising to "Come Download From Me" ? I wonder what sort of quality standards there will be.

soulxtc

I know I like this model very much.

FINALLY someone gets it! Here is a company that if they do everything they say could possibly turn the tide on itunes. If people find that they would actually get rewarded (instead of being branded a "criminal") for uploading their music files and get them DRM free they may start going with this service instead. That is....IF the RIAA and the recordiong companies they represent... allow it. That is the question....WILL the recording companies finally see that people don't want DRM music? Will they also understand that rewarding a person for uploading music files to a pay network is better than treating them like scum and then wanting them to play by their rules? Time will tell. Also pricing will be a big factor in weather or not people come to this service. Will evertything be strictly 99 cents as the industry wants it for each song? Or....Will the recording companies allow this new start up company to distribute music files for UNDER what their "cash cow" itunes is doing? and DRM free at that? To me that is going to be the determining factor. But I hate to say it as greedy as the music companies are it would not suprise me in the slightest if the said no to this new venture. But they would only be slitting their own throat as most people do not download their tunes from legal scources like the itunes store. Most peoiple think 99 cents is STILL way too expensive for a song.

From what Ive read you would get credits for more music purchases but probably also cash if theyre charging people to DL your tunes. If you have a 200GB plus music library as I have I wouldnt upload for more music but for cash? Definitely. They have to offer you a cut if theyre charging people for your music to download.

ejonesss

what kind of reward? money? points good for their online store? points good for download que?

Grooveshark, first LEGAL P2P music service?

Related Stories

Recommended Software