First Amazon “angered music labels by starting a cloud-based music player without their cooperation,” now “Google is doing the same thing,” Claire Cain Miller reports for The New York Times.
“Google plans to introduce its long-awaited cloud music player Tuesday at Google I/O, its developers conference in San Francisco,” Miller reports. “The service, which it calls Music Beta by Google, will let people upload their music collections to the Internet and listen to the songs on Android phones or tablets and on computers.”
MacDailyNews Take: Our Lady of Perpetual Beta strikes again.
Miller reports, “Google does not have licenses from the music labels, even though it has been negotiating with them for months to team up on a cloud service. As a result, users of Google’s service cannot do certain things that would legally require licenses, like sharing songs with friends and buying songs from Google.”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: We’ll wait for the real solution, one that’s likely to be properly licensed and therefore perfectly legal and safe to use, thanks.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Fred Mertz” for the heads up.]
Ah, Gaagle, you are not so evil.
Masterbetas
lol!
Ah, but wait while the masterbates!
(history of the world movie)
A service no one wants and no one needs. For 95% of users 2 GB on there device is all the music they can handle. No one wants to have to be connected every second they listen to music. That’s why we invented portable players in the first place.
Apple fans must not fear.
Fear is the mind-killer.
Google is the privacy-killer.
Google R&D is the little-copycat machine that brings total obliteration to taste and class.
Apple will face this “open threat”.
Apple will permit it to pass over them and through them.
And when it has gone past, Apple will turn the inner eye to see its path.
Where the photocopier junkies have gone there will be nothing……Only the true innovator will remain.
Sounds nice (in a scary big brother kind of way, lol!)
I forgot to give credit with apologies (for the poor take) to the original, Frank Herbert’s Litany Against Fear of the Bene Gesserits. I somehow had assumed that everyone knew.
BTW from the Dune books.
I don’t see why google has to ask for licenses. it’s only storage, and my songs will be there for me to access it.
Because the labels wan’t you to pay for your music again and again just to listen to it in a different way. Want a ringtone? Pay again. Want to stream it over the internet? Pay again. Want a digital copy on your computer instead of just having it on a CD? According to the RIAA, you should pay again! To the thinking of the labels, you don’t own your music, you’re just paying them for the privilege of listening to it for a while.
Isn’t Android still beta? So what’s different with this junk they’re shoveling down the poor confused Android user’s throat?
Consider what happened the last time that Google launched a media service without signing up the content providers. This effort looks to be just as successful as Google TV!
Or Google Video ( before they bought You Tube).
OK, what about battery life? That transceiver must be working it little reared off. Must be one of those Google perks that no one knows about yet.
Not really useful to me yet. At least until I can download a playlist to my device and play it without streaming.
Goorgle putting out a BETA service?
One word: Codefendants.
I use to use Safari and found it very unreliable and slow compared to Chrome… I now love Chrome! No turning back!
I tried to like Chrome but it’s a UI disaster. I uninstalled it after giving it a try for two weeks. I don’t think it’s that fast either. Certainly not any faster than Safari. I use Firefox as a complement to Safari which I think has miles better UI than Chrome. Another Google fail.
There is no such difference
You are a troll
So, how are you playing Quicktime video in Chrome?
If Apple were to do the same thing as Amazon and Google, there would be a Senate committee hearing, a lawsuit immediately filed by all major record labels, and analysts claiming impending doom on Apple. Google and Amazon get a side story in tech news.
Google is taking evil from search directly into new markets… Looks like they fixed the Microsoft FailBus that has been broken down since the 90’s…
Can’t wait to hear Gina Tripani squealing about how AWESOME it is to have access to 20,000 songs as opposed to 10M from Apple’s iTunes
(/sark)
With Google and Amazon telling the media companies to bend over and slide down their pants, the music executives might start thinking that working with Steve Jobs isn’t so bad after all. Even if Jobs is a dick in negotiations, he does negotiate and stick by his agreements.
Couldn’t agree more. Once these executives learn that their most profitable bet is with Apple they will gladly give into Steve’s demands.
Great! Another big pile of data for Google to mine. No thanks. If I wanted a cloud music locker, which I don’t, really, I would wait until someone offered one using a business model that didn’t depend on mining my personal data.
God it’s funny to hear people get all butthurt about this. First of all it’s awesome that another company is giving the music industry the finger and telling them that people who own music should be able to store it where ever they want, and access it at anytime.
Good job Google.
Now, that being said – of course I’d wait for the Apple solution, if it ever happens. I have a 16GB iPhone and a majority of my storage is taken up by apps. I’m all for a solution that will allow me to place a copy of my entire iTunes library and access it from any iOS device on the web thru streaming.
20,000 songs are more than enough to backup to the cloud. The only crappy things about the Google solution is that it most likely will be Android only and all my DRM’d Fairplay stuff will not work.
I could give a rats ass if they know I like to listen to Pearl Jam — people freak out about Google…Ya’ll need to calm down and realize this is good for everyone.
What I don’t like is the fact that google is most likely launching a half-baked, half-ass solution for music streaming (beta is in the name for f sake) without making the proper license agreements just to beat Apple to the market. Now all fandroids will gloat over the this because google kaunched it first and Apple copied them.
It does sort of reek of Google trying to ‘beat Apple to the punch’ before the North Carolina data behemoth goes live.
A first mover can also be a first victim.
Google often attaches “beta” to the name, doesn’t necessarily mean much. Gmail was in “beta” for like 6+ years, doesn’t mean it wasn’t any good during that time.
I don’t understand your rant about wanting to have all your music in the cloud. In the first place there is a central location to save your music and that is on your Mac with iTunes as the sync medium. I find it extremely useful as I get to choose what songs I want by making playlists.
Google’s cloud will be another mechanism to vampire off your personal information. I don’t trust Google beyond search. There’s no way a cloud music collection will be better than iTunes and will represent yet another failed attempt by Google to stay relevant.
If I want cloud based music there’s Pandora, Spotify or Intermet radio of which there is a variety to choose from.
Until Apple releases iCloud then you’ll be all like, “Holy shit this is awesome… it’s iTunes in the cloud… OMGBBQ!!1!”
I don’t want to have to be chained to my Mac/iTunes anytime I want to listen to an album. If it’s on the cloud that’s great…If I want to listen to something obscure in my library I don’t have to wait to get back to my MBP.
And, if something awful happens the music is backed up offsite – I don’t really see a downside to this.
Nothing like using up your monthly data rates just to listen to music which you could sync and carry on your phone anyway.
Maybe it can just me, but it would be better if in future you can share more about this subject. making good content.