3 ms·

DMCA compliance, or at least DMCA-as-interpreted-by-various-labels compliance. Shame about loved tracks, but the "my library" station is the best, and that wil

DMCA compliance, or at least DMCA-as-interpreted-by-various-labels compliance. Shame about loved tracks, but the "my library" station is the best, and that will still work.

jbail 16y ago
It's sad, but record companies destroy any potential for Internet based music. Music apps last only so long before they get sued or need to restrict your listening freedom in some way. The other thing that happens to the cool little music upstarts is that they get bought by a big parent company (like CBS buying Last.fm or Apple buying LaLa), who inevitably either makes horrible changes at the expense of existing users or re-purposes the app to suggest only major label artists.
samstokes 16y ago
I think it's more likely just an attempt to reduce their license fees. The music licensing societies (at least in the UK) have different classes of license, at different price points, and licenses which allow "interactive use" are much more expensive. The distinction is (IANAL) about whether or not the user has detailed control over what tracks they listen to, and in what order. The features they're removing sound a lot like "interactive use": * Loved Tracks Radio: streaming your list of loved tracks * Playlists: streaming a list of tracks you've chosen for a playlist * Personal Tag Radio: streaming a list of artists, albums or tracks that you have tagged
- russss 16y ago
  Yes, it's an interactive/non-interactive distinction in play. (DMCA has become a synonym for "non-interactive" in the industry.) Last.fm has always argued that these radio modes were non-interactive, but the labels have clearly got the better of them.
- timmaah 16y ago
  Those also used to be their main selling points for folks subscribe to lastfm. Their revenue from subscriptions must not be enough to affect their decisions with regards to license fees

DMCA compliance, or at least DMCA-as-interpreted-by-various-labels compliance. Shame about loved tracks, but the "my library" station is the best, and that will still work.

jbail 16y ago

It's sad, but record companies destroy any potential for Internet based music. Music apps last only so long before they get sued or need to restrict your listening freedom in some way. The other thing that happens to the cool little music upstarts is that they get bought by a big parent company (like CBS buying Last.fm or Apple buying LaLa), who inevitably either makes horrible changes at the expense of existing users or re-purposes the app to suggest only major label artists.

samstokes 16y ago

I think it's more likely just an attempt to reduce their license fees. The music licensing societies (at least in the UK) have different classes of license, at different price points, and licenses which allow "interactive use" are much more expensive. The distinction is (IANAL) about whether or not the user has detailed control over what tracks they listen to, and in what order. The features they're removing sound a lot like "interactive use": * Loved Tracks Radio: streaming your list of loved tracks * Playlists: streaming a list of tracks you've chosen for a playlist * Personal Tag Radio: streaming a list of artists, albums or tracks that you have tagged

russss 16y ago
Yes, it's an interactive/non-interactive distinction in play. (DMCA has become a synonym for "non-interactive" in the industry.) Last.fm has always argued that these radio modes were non-interactive, but the labels have clearly got the better of them.
timmaah 16y ago
Those also used to be their main selling points for folks subscribe to lastfm. Their revenue from subscriptions must not be enough to affect their decisions with regards to license fees