RIAA CEO Makes $1.6 Million. RIAA CEO Can’t Shut Down Grooveshark…


It’s extremely difficult to feel sorry for the major recording labels, especially when their ‘innovation’ involves cheating their own artists and rewarding failure with massive salaries.  Which brings us to the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), a trade group tasked with enforcing copyright for the Universal Music Group, Sony Music Entertainment, and Warner Music Group.

So if that’s their one job, why can’t the RIAA figure out how to shut down Grooveshark for good, even after winning a decisive legal victory earlier this month?  Why didn’t the RIAA spend the entire Memorial Day weekend smashing down doors, terrorizing DNS registrants, chasing rogue developers, and shutting sh*t down in the name of their major label clients?

More importantly, why is the CEO of this organization being rewarded with a $1.63 million salary, while the latest Grooveshark clone surges in popularity?  Did Cary Sherman even check in this weekend?

Here’s what happens when you go to grooveshark.li right now, which is still live after more than a week online, and now a top-ranked global site.






13 Responses

  1. Art Davje

    This ‘Grooveshark’ is an almost zero-traffic joke, why are you bothered about?

  2. DavidB

    The RIAA wasn’t even a party to the legal action against Grooveshark. Grooveshark’s settlement with Universal Music reportedly included handing over the Grooveshark trademark rights to Universal, which is how Universal’s lawyers are able to deal very quickly against any new websites using the Grooveshark name, as it is much easier to deal with infringement of trademarks than copyright. Which prompts the thought: could artists or labels register the title of every song as a trademark?

    • There is something...

      “Which prompts the thought: could artists or labels register the title of every song as a trademark?”

      Welcome to a legal nightmare, with so many songs using the same title (part or full). I don’t think anyone wants to open that Pandora’s box.

      Also, I can’t imagine the cost of doing it for catalogs of hundred thousands of songs…

    • Paul Resnikoff
      Paul Resnikoff

      The RIAA wasn’t even a party to the legal action against Grooveshark.

      C’mon David, get real. Your ocean liner is sinking, stop debating who’s job it is to fix the hull. If I’m an exec at UMG, I would be asking, well, WTF we’re paying our trade group millions of dollars for. It’s not to summer in Nantucket, it’s to crack some skulls and protect my copyrights. At that type of salary, I own you and your time, that’s the way it works.

  3. Jose

    I’m sad to see groveshark go not because i listen to music for free. i actually used it to sample songs and then will go to iTunes and purchase it. why?? because i do believe in not stealing. and the quality of most of the songs was very crappy.

  4. musicinmyhead

    That’s just a clone of grooveshark.io, which went online immediately after the real Grooveshark fell. Just a horrible mp3 ‘search engine.’

  5. musicinmyhead

    Furthermore, should we euthanize people with eidetic / photographic memories? I have a somewhat ‘phonographic’ memory and I ‘save’ the music in my brain when I hear it. What’s the difference if I keep that copy of the song on a hard drive, in the ‘cloud,’ or in my own noggin’? Hmm???

    Yeah, that’s what I thought!

  6. Nitmoi

    I used Grooveshark regularly, so I’m sorry it’s gone. I used it only for one purpose: I need to hear the full length of songs in decent quality as part of my purchase decision. I would hear music here and there, determine the title and artist, listen to the whole thing on Grooveshark, finally accept or reject it. For every accepted track, I would buy it from Amazon or iTunes.

    Without the ability to hear songs in their entirety, I will be buying less music in the future. Too bad for me, and too bad for the music industry.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Verify Your Humanity *