Musi has faced objections to its business practices in the past. In October 2019, the company filed a lawsuit against an online ad network, alleging that it had withheld payments due for ads running within the Musi app. In November of that year, the ad network filed a counterclaim alleging that it suspended payments after discovering that Musi’s business was fraudulent. “Musi was knowingly and illegally copying music from YouTube,” the countercomplaint said, alleging that when advertisers found out, he lost more than $7 million. A judge granted a request by Musi to dismiss the case without prejudice in 2020.
Cherie Hu, the founder of music business research network Water & Music, described Musi’s interface as utilitarian. It’s a place to listen to music and make playlists, and that’s it. Users do not see song lyrics, information about upcoming concerts, or any features indicating collaborations or partnerships with artists. “It’s a very generic way of curating and presenting music,” he says. Even after more than a decade in operation, it still feels more like a brilliant computer science student’s senior project than a professional product.
Musi claims to not host the music videos its users stream, and instead emphasizes that these videos come from YouTube. Those videos appear within Musi’s basic interface, but some flaunt their origins with YouTube or Vevo watermarks. Users have to sit through video ads right when they open Musi and can then stream uninterrupted audio, but the video ads play silently every few songs while the music continues. The app also displays banner ads, but users can remove all ads from the app for a one-time fee of $5.99.
Unlike its main competitors, Musi does not offer a download function, so the music stops without Internet access. “Honestly, this will never be a feature, due to the restrictions set by YouTube,” a Musi support account said a fan last year who asked on Reddit if an offline mode was coming.
James Grimmelmann, a professor of digital and internet law at Cornell University, says the way Musi operates raises a number of questions. “Is this copyright infringement? A license for YouTube might not be a license for Musi,” he says. “Does this violate YouTube’s terms of service in such a way that YouTube could cut them?” For now, the answers are unclear.
One question is whether playing a song on Musi will generate the same amount of revenue for an artist as if it were played directly on YouTube, especially since calculations for streaming payments depend on a variety of factors. Musi’s support account on Reddit has told the listeners which he does, without providing further details or evidence. It is also unclear whether a rights holder wishing to remove their music from Musi would have a clear mechanism to do so without also having to remove it from YouTube.
By taking advantage YouTube In this way, Musi appears to have accomplished something remarkable: building a booming business in music streaming without taking on the legwork of striking deals with labels and distributors. That leads David Herlihy, a copyright attorney and music industry professor at Northeastern University, to describe Musi as a “bottom feeder.” He believes the app has made progress so far because it technically doesn’t break any laws. “It’s legal,” he says. “They are linked to YouTube and YouTube has licenses.”