If you're using the JetGroove MP3 online music download service, The Register says, you may be running the risk of a copyright infringement action -- at least so far as recordings made by the independents are concerned. JetGroove's service was launched only on 5 October. According to its website:
"During first three days JetGroove received an enormous amount of attention from users, record labels, artists, authors and publishers. And this attention brought some contradictions to the light of music community. The music community was disappointed at some parts of our website and made some wrong assumptions. We wanted to clear up all misunderstandings that arose so we want to explain our position how our website is organized and business is led ...The IPKat notes that, while JetGroove's sentiments may be good and its intentions pure, anything done with a copyright-protected work but without the copyright owners' authorisations remains an infringement unless (i) the law permits it or (ii) the consent of the copyright owners can be implied.
The line that JetGroove is going to continue to follow is: LEGAL SALES ONLY. The project was created to give independents a good chance of being known in the world, and earning money, not to make them suffer again as they do from p2p systems. And the least thing JetGroove planned to do is to violate rights of record labels, publishers, artists or authors. JetGroove officially states that if you are not interested to have your tracks on www.jetgroove.com, you should contact JetGroove immediately and all the information we have about your tracks will be taken off the website ASAP.".
IPKAT INFRINGEMENT WARNING
![IPKAT INFRINGEMENT WARNING]()
Reviewed by Jeremy
on
Tuesday, October 12, 2004
Rating:
Follow the IPKat on LinkedIn 
![[Guest post] EUIPO Second Board of Appeal refers case to Grand Board of Appeal following earlier refusal to register a photograph of a man’s head/face as an EU trade mark](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUj9v-k3DYaSVMR4lsmKDLHVB5nIoINuvZNbH2TQCelrfaAE9qmGSAQs-plzQ7HnZ7Svk_gRdrIODp0Nat5vpWajduit3xkArNhK76AHhX770RIJ62thfCVI5fnvcXU-5zH4NkUSfPY9FjRMFiK7OKJ7m7YSo2FzhyPSoA8ZWCsxaOXb0bBCoPQA/s72-c/Picture%201.png)
![[Guest post] Benelux Office rules on opposition proceedings prepared by ChatGPT](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi29VY0rNNP1Hqyz8RgB47r4q7fhqQfYHxsEbX_RKmT4KU5Y_vg7vB6dsAW91CidjMfJ38klTvD4mMtZb3QmwFPAHaGF88BPttWSbfYvo7UUg7MpFRTNtEjThmG0QaX2qZFFHSnN71i3YQZSBFC0SL7PgkAlme-XH8cSNWRFbOAOuLr_LMOGcImLQ/s72-c/Screenshot%202024-12-04%20at%2020.45.58.png)
Posts
No comments:
All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.
It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.
Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html