Musi’s Music Streaming: Legality and Business Model Scrutinized
Introduction
Musi, a free music streaming app, has gained immense popularity among teenagers and young adults. However, its unusual business model has raised concerns about its legality and music sourcing strategy.
Legal Concerns
YouTube Music Sourcing:
Musi claims to source its music from YouTube, but this practice raises copyright infringement questions. YouTube licenses its music content specifically, and Musi may not have the rights to distribute and monetize it.
YouTube Terms of Service Violations:
YouTube’s API terms prohibit app users from replacing or blocking its advertisements. Musi appears to do just that, replacing YouTube ads with its own.
Lawsuits and Legal Threats:
Record labels and music industry groups are reportedly considering legal action against Musi for potentially lacking proper distribution and monetization rights. Vevo, which distributes music videos on YouTube, also plans to take measures against the app for unauthorized use of their mark.
Music Sourcing Strategy
YouTube Integration:
Musi claims to rely entirely on YouTube for music content. Users can stream music videos within Musi’s interface, but some videos bear watermarks from YouTube or Vevo.
Lack of Download Function:
Unlike competing apps, Musi does not offer a download option. This restriction is attributed to YouTube’s limitations, highlighting Musi’s dependency on YouTube’s platform.
Business Practices
Ad Revenue:
Despite being a free service, Musi generates revenue through programmed ad placement within the app. It has been ranked among the top-grossing iOS apps in North America based on ad revenue.
Removal of Ads:
Users can pay a one-time fee of $5.99 to remove all ads from the app, increasing its appeal to those who find ads disruptive.
Privacy and Ownership:
Musi remains a private company with limited public information about its structure or ownership. The company’s founders have removed themselves from the company’s LinkedIn profiles.
Industry Insights
Piracy Resurgence:
Musi’s success reflects the growing demand for free or low-cost music streaming options. Digital music piracy has been on the rise, fueled by frustration with subscription fatigue and inflation.
Copycat Apps:
Musi has inspired imitators in the iOS app landscape, highlighting the appeal of its free, ad-supported model. However, these imitators often face removal from app stores due to deceptive practices.
Conclusion
While Musi has gained a significant following, its business model remains under scrutiny. The legality of its music sourcing and potential violations of YouTube’s terms of service raise concerns. Musi’s success emphasizes the demand for accessible music streaming options, but it also highlights the ethical and legal considerations that must be addressed in this evolving industry.
Divya 
Mehek