Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Wasn't there some ruling that said that websites that host user contributed content aren't liable for copyright infringement, iff they comply with take down requests in a timely manor? I would think that would apply here.

That exists for sites that purportedly have a purpose other than copyright violation. Muxtape was made specifically to play other people's music. It wasn't billed as a site for musicians. That means most of its content was geared towards illegality.

Another tought: would muxtape have been able to get a license similar to the one Pandora uses for it's service?

Probably not. Pandora's deal exists because it helps people find new music, and because people can't directly play whatever they want. The other big deal, Last.FM's, allows only three plays of a song before that song is locked off. A completely open model like Muxtape's couldn't have worked like that.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: