Major Labels

EMI Says Grooveshark Didn’t Pay It’s Bill, Grooveshark Calls Label “Monopolistic”

image from www.hypebot.comThe controversy around Grooveshark continues.  EMI's recorded music division has suspended it's deal  alleging non-payment.  EMI was the only major label who has reached a deal with the controversial music streamer.

According to court documents, Grooveshark signed "a promissory note on Nov. 29, 2011, unconditionally promising to render payment of the sum certain of $450,000 to (EMI-owned) Capitol Records in accordance with the payment schedule."  But on March 15, Grooveshark failed to make a $100,000 payment, according EMI, who also say that Grooveshark has not made any payments at all to the label.

But in a written response to CNet, Grooveshark tried to paint a very different picture: "Grooveshark was recently forced to make the difficult decision to part ways with EMI due to EMI's currently unsustainable streaming rates and EMI's pending merger with Universal Music Group, which we consider monopolistic and in violation of antitrust laws."

The company also claims that, "to date, Grooveshark has paid over $2.6 million to EMI, but we have yet to find sustainable streaming rates."  They also appear to beleive that operating without direct licenes from labels or publishers should not be seen as an affront to artists.  "Grooveshark's dedication to artists and rights holders remains the same," the company's statement concluded.

MORE: Grooveshark Introduces Video Engagement Platform To Promote Emerging Artists

Share on:

7 Comments

  1. So because they think its too expensive they keep using their music? Grooveshark are so pathetic

  2. Grooveshark rips-off one of the Rip-off Major Labels (legally – although in default of payment).Find it quite ironic myself 😛

  3. Nobody will defend groove hark because no one values Their service very much. They should consider only using independent artist music. But I have a feeling they wouldn’t pay them either. Bad service = bad revenue stream regardless of the major labels rates

  4. I don’t know if Grooveshark is in the wrong here, but I think their service is phenomenal. Where else can you listen to this many albums for free? Ideally, art as a commodity is crass to begin with, so i see no problem with giving away music. People are gonna buy it if they truly support the artist anyway or at least they should. Intellectual property rights are anachronistic at this point. By the way, I am an electronic musician myself. http://www.nairbomanblog.blogspot.com

  5. Of course their service is phenomenal, you can do a lot more for your users when you don’t have to pay for your content or abide by any actual licenses. These guys are fucking crooks.

  6. Thank You Earbits For Spelling It Out… I am kinda digging your service…when is a mobile version coming?

Comments are closed.