4 ms·
I think "Write a music player client that can stuff your music into an encrypted blob" is a bigger hurdle for most people than paying $25/month. Besides, doesn
by il 16y ago
I think "Write a music player client that can stuff your music into an encrypted blob" is a bigger hurdle for most people than paying $25/month.
Besides, doesn't Grooveshark already do this for free?
- lukev 16y agoWell, as a startup, I mean. There shouldn't be any legal hurdles, anyway - it's really just a backup system specialized for music. And I'll be honest, I have no clue what Grooveshark's business model is. I like it, but I don't see how the RIAA doesn't come down on them like a ton of bricks, and I really doubt the ads they show can cover what they ought to be paying in royalties.
- pg 16y agoThere shouldn't be any legal hurdles, anyway - it's really just a backup system specialized for music. I would not assume that.
- CoryMathews 16y agoGrooveshark has deals with a few of the major record labels. They get paid everytime grooveshark plays a song. They have been sued a couple times in the past and now have deals with most of these labels. Grooveshark makes money through their VIP, advertising, and promotions put on by the artists themselves. Technically they are not sharing music since you cannot download it, which is why I would guess they get around a lot of things that way.
- Tichy 16y agoSounds like a good idea for an OS project, if it doesn't exist yet. But how cheap is storage in the cloud? 25$/months is definitely too much, if that's what S3 costs for 100GB?
- lukev 16y agoS3 and comparable services typically cost around $.15/GB/MO. You can sometimes go down to $.10 with a reduced redundancy service, or for very high volumes (approaching petabytes). It's a bit high for music backup.