Grooveshark announced a deal with Sony/ATV

Grooveshark, the often controversial streaming service which had already reached a settlement with EMI Music Publishing, which had sued the digital firm,  now has a licensing deal in place. with Sony/ATV, the company that now controls EMI Music Publishing. Details of Grooveshark's deal with Sony/ATV/EMI are not known, though it does give the digital set-up a little more legitimacy as it continues to fight litigation from all of the major record companies. 

US courts take a close look at "safe harbor"

US District Judge Louis Stanton has stood by his original decision in the 2007 billion-dollar lawsuit brought by entertainment giant Viacom accusing Google-owned website YouTube of knowingly profiting from pirated video clips. The suit was dismissed in June 2010 by Judge Stanton on the grounds that YouTube was protected against Viacom's claims by 'safe harbor' provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Judge Stanton confirmed his original decision in the case after being instructed by the The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York to take another look saying "There is no evidence YouTube induced its users to submit infringing videos, provided users with detailed instructions about what content to upload or edited their content, prescreened submissions for quality, steered users to infringing videos or otherwise interacted with infringing users to a point where it might be said to have participated in their infringing activity."  Viacom have indicated a further appeal.

And in a case involving the controversial website Grooveshark, a New York state appeals court has held that the safe harbor defence found in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act does not apply to pre-1972 recordings. a panel of five judges in the New York State Supreme Court of Appeals found in favor of Universal Music Group (UMG) in its copyright suit against Grooveshark, reversing a lower state court decision favoring Escape Media Group Inc., the operators of Grooveshark. The case seems to conflict with the earlier but still recent decision  in Capitol Records v. MP3tunes, where the Manhattan Supreme Court found "no indication in the text of the DMCA that Congress intended to limit the reach of the safe harbors provided by the statute to just post-1972 recordings."

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/18/entertainment-us-google-viacom-idUSBRE93H17S20130418

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-youtube-prevails-copyright-suit-viacom-20130418,0,5832848.story

Grooveshark app back on Google

Grooveshark's Android app has reappeared in Google's app store, over a year after it was evicted from the official Android app platform, seemingly because of pressure put on the web giant by the major music companies. Universal, Sony and Warners are also currently suing Grooveshark for enabling copyright infringement. EMI is suing the service for non payment of a promissory note, having previously licensed its material to the streaming service. Grooveshark insists it operates a takedown system in line with the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act, so is fully legal

EMI joins battle against Grooveshark

EMI has joined fellow majors Universal, Sony and Warner in suing Grooveshark. But in a slight twist, EMI Music Publishing filed a lawsuit against Grooveshark operators Escape Media claiming the digital firm is in breach of the licensing agreement reached in 2009 at the conclusion of a previous legal dispute for the non-payment of royalties and according to reports, the legal papers filed with the New York State Supreme Court claims Grooveshark "hasn't made a single royalty payment to EMI, nor provided a single accounting statement" under the existing licensing deal, and that the digital firm now owes at least $150,000 in royalties. Responding to the EMI action, the streaming platform said in a statement "This is a contract dispute that we expect to resolve".

Grooveshark defends its service in face of industry opposition

Digital Music News reports that online music service Grooveshark has issued an open letter to the music industry, defending its legality and protesting the removal of its mobile applications by Apple and Google, CEO Paul Geller wrote "There is nothing illegal about what Grooveshark offers to consumers” adding “Grooveshark is completely legal because we comply with the laws passed by Congress, but we are not licensed by every label (yet)" and explained “We pay for our streams, and we actively negotiate with virtually every single content owner." The company argues it is operating within the parameters of the "safe harbor" clause of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) and that it actively polices content from its 25 million users with Geller saying "We've taken down over 1.76 million files and suspended upload privileges to 22,274 users," Grooveshark is currently being sued by Universal Music Group for copyright infringement. A second major label, EMI, dropped its suit against the company and licensed its catalogue in 2009..