This article doesn't offer any new information since the launch, and the only support for the idea that they've bungled the launch is one negative review - ther

This article doesn't offer any new information since the launch, and the only support for the idea that they've bungled the launch is one negative review - there have been several positive ones, as well. Moreover, I have a hard time swallowing that "the bully at the table was Google", given that the article's only support for this is the recording industry's claim that "The discussions were confused by Google ... adjusting how Music would actually work in ways that fundamentally changed how the labels thought about their IP, and thus how to license it", particularly in light of BMI's insistence that one person streaming their own music constitutes public performance [1]. This sounds to me like the music industry insisted on fundamentally crippling the service, and given the choice to cut one key feature or another, Google found it in their best interest to cut the one that makes the music industry the most money. I don't see any evidence yet that that was the right or the wrong choice from a user's perspective. [1] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2534850 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2534850