The songs that the AI CEO provided to Smith originally had file names full of randomized numbers and letters such as “n_7a2b2d74-1621-4385-895d-b1e4af78d860.mp3,” the DOJ noted in its detailed press release.
When uploading them to streaming platforms, including Amazon Music, Apple Music, Spotify, and YouTube Music, the man would then change the songs’ names to words like “Zygotes,” “Zygotic,” and “Zyme Bedewing,” whatever that is.
The artist naming convention also followed a somewhat similar pattern, with names ranging from the normal-sounding “Calvin Mann” to head-scratchers like “Calorie Event,” “Calms Scorching,” and “Calypso Xored.”
To manufacture streams for these fake songs, Smith allegedly used bots that stream the songs billions of times without any real person listening. As with similar schemes, the bots’ meaningless streams were ultimately converted to royalty paychecks for the people behind them.
So why arrested? This is what AI is for right? Oh, he screwed over the wrong people didn’t he?
Or screwed everyone over too little; if he had screwed everyone for ten billion he would be heralded as a genius.
Stealing is only wrong if you steal from rich people. It’s perfectly acceptable if the victims are poor. /s
Was anyone really stealing? The ads were served, right? The checks for the ads were paid.
I hate ads but their designed to be shown to people and intentionally using bots to inflate ad views is very clearly fraud. Silicon valley had something similar with bot farms to fake user engagement to take in VC funding. You take money in exchange for some kinda engagement metric which you’re faking.
In addition to the others that replied to you:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/16/malta-car-bomb-kills-panama-papers-journalist
The owners made an example of the journalist that broke the Panama Papers story.
wanting to see if the killer was ever caught. Daphne Caruana Galizia Killer Caught After a thorough investigation, several individuals have been implicated and charged in connection with the assassination of Maltese journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia on October 16, 2017. Key developments include:
Vincent Muscat’s Confession: In March 2021, Vincent Muscat, one of the three men accused of the murder, confessed to the crime in court. He described how he and two others, brothers George and Alfred Degiorgio, used binoculars and a telescope to follow Caruana Galizia’s movements, eventually planting and triggering the car bomb that killed her. Life Sentence Sought: In August 2021, prosecutors sought a life sentence for Yorgen Fenech, a businessman accused of masterminding the murder. Fenech has pleaded not guilty and is awaiting trial. Malta State Responsibility: An independent inquiry, concluded in July 2021, found the Maltese state responsible for Caruana Galizia’s murder due to its creation of a “culture of impunity” that allowed her killers to believe they would face minimal consequences. Arrests and Charges: Several individuals have been arrested and charged in connection with the murder, including: Vincent Muscat (pleaded guilty and received a 15-year sentence in February 2021) George Degiorgio (charged and awaiting trial) Alfred Degiorgio (charged and awaiting trial) Yorgen Fenech (charged and awaiting trial) Melvin Theuma (turned state witness and received a pardon in November 2019) Investigation Ongoing: The investigation is ongoing, with authorities continuing to gather evidence and build cases against those implicated in the murder. Timeline of Key Events
October 16, 2017: Daphne Caruana Galizia killed in a car bomb attack December 2017: Arrests of suspects, including Vincent Muscat, George Degiorgio, and Alfred Degiorgio November 2019: Melvin Theuma, a taxi driver and alleged middleman, receives a pardon and becomes a state witness March 2021: Vincent Muscat confesses to the murder in court August 2021: Prosecutors seek a life sentence for Yorgen Fenech July 2021: Independent inquiry finds Malta state responsible for Caruana Galizia’s murder Note: The investigation is ongoing, and new developments may emerge as the case proceeds.
He was arrested because he faked a ton of information related to his accounts to make it look like many people were doing it. I love that he gamed the system, but also it sounds like he totally committed financial fraud while doing so.
There are other people who have gamed the system without also committing fraud
He didn’t get arrested for AI generated music. He got arrested for faking multiple accounts to upload music and using bots to generate fake listens, thus stealing millions of dollars. If he did the same thing with music he actually wrote and played, he would still be arrested.
Fuck it. This scam was clever enough that I appreciate and sorta admire it.
No.
Music play-farming has been a thing for probably almost a decade by now.
Spotify divides the huge amount of money they get from subscribers each month, evenly among all the plays during that month.
Someone figured out ages ago, that since spotify has a free tier, that means that if you can get some tracks on spotify as an artist, you can then create an army of free-tier bot accounts and massively inflate the share of the money you get paid as an “artist”.
Of course, this comes at the cost of everyone elses legit plays becoming worth less. Its an absolutely disgusting scam and Spotify has been ignoring it happening for years.
Adding AI generation into the mix is barely an innovation.
Edit: And if you’re wondering how it works with services that don’t have a free tier, it is done by hijacking peoples real accounts, then having them stream the relevant tracks over and over. Either by stealing entire accounts, or infecting devices that are already logged in with malware that will open the relevant app/website and play the tracks over and over.
The solution, to me, would seem to be to divide the revenue up on an individual basis instead. Does some sort of licensing issue prevent this? I’d think that the legitimate record labels would want to fix this loophole ASAP so that they can get more money.
AFAIK YT Music does this. The money from your subscription gets divided amongst whatever you listened to.
That still wouldn’t address the stolen account problem, but yes, it’d be a huge improvement.
I have no idea why Spotify still sticks to this massively exploitable model, except for the fact that it MASSIVELY inflates their stats for investors and advertisers.
Fuck Spotify, they can eat a bag of dicks after renewing Joe cum-guzzling Rogan for $200million. They deserve to have all of their money stolen.
It seems like it would be super easy for them to close this loophole. If you use the model that free tier listeners (real ones) will listen to about the same distribution of songs as the paying listeners, then just stop counting all free tier listeners and multiply the amount paid out for the pay-tier listeners by an appropriate factor to make payouts the same as before.
Y’know this guy seems intelligent enough to come up with this scheme, but not intelligent enough to keep a low profile. I honestly don’t understand that.
Personally, I’d do the math to pay myself a living wage with this so that my actual work salary is nothing but a cherry on top; manage it so it seems like hype is ebbing and flowing in a natural way. If you ever figure out a way to break the system like this, you should never act in a way that draws attention to yourself.
It’s like the person who figured out the free gas card hack and let her friends use it. If she’d kept it herself, she’d still get free gas.
If you ever figure out a way to break the system like this, you should never act in a way that draws attention to yourself.
There was a guy who robbed banks and he wasn’t caught for decades because he just lived an ordinary working-class lifestyle. Cheap little apartment, no fancy car etc. etc.
I thought the same, but it’s at the cost of real artists who are struggling to survive in a harsh market, so it still hurts. Sadly, this man isn’t unique. There are many Spotify listening farms listening to fake artists with AI generated songs just over 30sec which is the minimal listening requirement to get payed. And Spotify does nothing, as they get more money too.
I can appreciate a well performed scheme or crime, but only if it steals from the rich and big corps. In this case, it steals from honest artists who give us amazing music while mostly being under paid on a regular basis, with the exception here and there.
Stealing from the poor is really low. Only the biggest assholes are capable of doing that. (looks at all the billionaires)
Ah. I thought this was an isolated incident. I understand, and agree with, your point.
You don’t need those commas in that sentence. It makes you sound like Christopher Walken 😅
When I first read your comment about this scheme keeping money from artists I was skeptical. But, yup! It is right there on Spotify’s website:
We distribute the net revenue from Premium subscription fees and ads to rightsholders.
Now, granted a bunch of those “rightsholders” are likely big corporate record labels but your point stands. The little guy is getting screwed, too.
Though, adding to your final thought, I bet if it was only the little guy getting screwed and not the corpos I bet DOJ wouldn’t have cared.
I think you’re confused about who got hurt by the scheme. Billion dollar streaming platforms fucking over artists don’t need to be defended.
If you read my comment again, you can see I noted that Spotify is in on it. They profit too from these schemes. All those bots listening to 30sec AI songs playlists are running on Spotify premium accounts so Spotify won’t do anything to fight fraud. They take 30%.
I never defended any platform, I only defended the artists. So I guess the confused one is you, my friend.
Not sure how this is a crime… breach of TOS, sure, but a crime?
What law is being broken here?
If his fake bands are being paid for bot clicks, that’s a problem for the platforms to figure out. They need to examine their TOS.
Try to overthrow the US government? You can still be president. Break a companies arbitrary TOS? Police are at your door to take you away for a long time.
Well, of course. A president attempting to overthrow the government is a huge deal, you fetid fucking moron.
Interesting instance.
It might be because I’m drunk, but Trump-posting from “lemmy.packitsolutions.net” is genuinely hilarious. It’s giving Four Seasons Total Landscaping.
It’s fraud by false representation the U.K. Fraud is basically whenever you misuse a system for undue profit. The terms are very broad. “You know it when you see it” kind of thing.
So, in the u.k., it’s just one of those “we keep this handy to hurt the uppity poors” laws?
Not sure how this is a crime… breach of TOS, sure, but a crime?
What law is being broken here?
Not curious enough to actually read the article, eh?
Indicted on three counts involving money laundering and wire fraud
One may argue about money laundering but it’s pretty clearly fraud.
That’s just a generic indictment. And it’s allegedly. How do you perform wire fraud if a corporation legally paid you for a service?
Yeah I read another article on this and it’s very unclear what was illegal. If I had to guess they’re getting him on the technicalities of the process rather than on the actual streaming.
Edit: so I looked it up and realized wire fraud is “electronic” fraud, not bank wiring - Online definition
Which given the way the guy did it definitely seems to meet that definition.
Its theft, which is against the law to do against a company or person. Its similar to trading in empty boxes at GameStop or sending back boxes full of rocks to amazon.
Although most people seem to just pick a side based on whether they think that company should exist or not.
There are far too many loopholes for me not to hate companies be they small or large.
In Australia, “family trusts” are a sure way to write off a good chunk of your expenses (groceries, fuel and so on) while paying yourself a wage. If you really want you can cook the books taking cash sales for yourself too.
Don’t forget about “taking” whatever you want from the company, and writing that off as a loss.
Maybe I should hate people, but in a vacuum people are reasonable, logical and honorable. But once we introduce a “well maybe” or an “but what if I were to purchase fast food and disguise it as my own cooking?” my view of people becomes skewed.
I guess, I wanted to vent about how fucked everything seems to be and that I feel powerless to do anything about it. GameStop as a company probably deserve the rocks in boxes, Amazon deserve them too, all because people are running those companies.
I’m not above greed, but I’d like to think / feel that I put out more than I take and it seems quite uncommon in our modern society.
People will use whatever tools available to them. If their community supports it they will do it publicly, if not they will hide it. Drug use is a great example in some cases.
If Australia allows people to convert their families to a company just to avoid taxes, then thats on the government to fix, not the people to stop doing.
As long as there is no UBI there will always be pressure to use all tools available when things get hard.
This is what Spotify was made for so I dont really see the issue. He made the music and the listeners, just look at that engagement you love so much!
Imagine something like a DDOS attack. But it’s fans throwing AI listeners behind artists they love to boost them.
Imagine if fans shaped the music industry instead of the other way around?
People would very quickly figure out all the adverts being streamed to those accounts weren’t translating into sales, and they’d know something was amiss.
How do you prove that your ad campaign is working?
That’s the neat part- you don’t!
https://freakonomics.com/podcast/does-advertising-actually-work-part-2-digital-ep-441/
He found a flaw in the system and exploited it. Although he didn’t do anything particularly wrong, the tools he used allowed him to do it. Yet, somehow he has to pay the consequences and the companies that made the tools to exploit the system are not liable. Got it.
America’s darling Jeff Bezos exploited a flaw in his book suppliers policies to gain an unfair edge on competitors in the early days of Amazon. Best business man ever: give him the key to the city and a dick-shaped rocket ship.
He also got rich daddy and rich friend money to get money for his totally original and non-derivative idea of “selling things online”. Maybe that’s where this guy went wrong? No rich daddy?
The “selling things online” idea had been tried repeatedly before Amazon, and always failed. What Bezos did was find a way to actually (eventually) make money at it. That was a business strategy tour de force that was quite impressively executed. That’s not to say that Bezos is a good employer or a nice person. But it’s often the case that it’s not the originality of the idea that matters, as much as how it’s executed.
I believe in a well-regulated market he wouldn’t have found success like he did. Running for 8 years off of parents and VC/stock influx of millions of dollars screams anti-competitive to me. At the very least if we had decent privacy protection laws then the early data harvesting and business application probably would’ve been looked into at the start and shutdown, or else the company broken up from a monopoly once it started strangling whole sectors.
What.
If he used python for creating the bots, should python creators go to jail?
Nah he is saying the streaming services should fix their flaw / the guy shouldn’t have consequences for what he did, as it was all inputted in a legal way it seems.
Yeah but he is messing with rich people’s money and that is a #1 no no. If he was scamming poor people no one would have cared.
Exactly. The flaw is in the streaming service. They say “upload your music and make money” while skimming the lions share of the profits. But if they use tools that are openly available to all, i.e. generative AI (which uses copyrighted works for it generational algorithms) AND the Streaming service systems themselves, somehow this user is at fault because they don’t like the way he did it and the amount he uploaded. It seems to me it’s a problem with the system and not the user.
I mean I also agree that this seems like it shouldn’t be illegal, but as per what you’re saying, obviously people can use python for malicious intent, what do you mean?
I mean that creators of a tool shouldn’t be liable for a crime committed with that tool. Unless the tool was purposely made for doing crimes.
