3 ms·
Yeah, that seems like the low key "clever" part of the idea - instead of licensing the content, you are essentially just automating "directing the listener to p
by epiccoleman 3y ago
Yeah, that seems like the low key "clever" part of the idea - instead of licensing the content, you are essentially just automating "directing the listener to play a track".
It at least makes some common sense that the service could just piggyback onto a user's existing personal license for music (ultimately, how is it different than the DJ saying "ok, now play Sound Chaser"?).
Does that make legal sense in a world where record labels have fancy lawyers? Idk.
- withinboredom 3y agoAs long as they are getting paid, they probably don't care. If there is some legal way for them to get paid more, then they will care, a lot. They'd probably go after the service either way to get a settlement and/or set a precedent that they should get more money; unless you somehow got their 'blessing' before embarking on the adventure (likely some kind of investment to make sure they get their money and have control). </old man rant> IIRC, he had quite the adventure. He got flown on private jets by labels all over the world, often-times, not even getting his passport checked. He said the 'other half' lives in an entirely different world and he got a taste of it. Heh, it might be worth going on the adventure just for the sake of the adventure.