"The Bands and the Fans Were Fake. The $10 Million Was Real"

[CyberGene]

Why shouldn’t it be about the money? Businesses are for that. They make money. Streaming services offer musicians a service. There are conditions and rules. If you find it unfair, then don’t work with them. But calling it stealing as though they violate their conditions, is silly. It’s easy to make and sell your own CD-s and digital files nowadays. Spotify isn’t the only possible way of distributing your music. 
 

Not sure if this is a political talk, so mods, feel free to delete this paragraph if you think so, but as a Bulgarian and a descendant of people who were oppressed by the communist regime in Bulgaria after 1944, basically an ideology that taught people to hate the rich and a regime that destroyed the lives of so many people, I’m amazed to read some talk that to me sounds like what the precursors to the Eastern Bloc communist ideology was… 🧐

[Thethirdapple]

We as humans have found endless methods for exploiting each other for self centered profit, well before “communist regimes” and well after the “corporatist regime”…

 

Not sure that signing up with a service which brands itself as “never going to do something with YOUR content” and then the next year changes its terms of service to let you know that your content has been sold to an AI warehouse of shite constitutes “fair use”…

and of course right on time this just appeared in my inbox…

 

 

 

PEACE

_
_
_

[cedar]

12 hours ago, Thethirdapple said:

Each count carries how any years?

 

This is actually a very complex question, in the federal system.    You can get 20 years for a single count of wire fraud, and in theory sentences for each count can be run consecutively.  Also can be sentenced to separate terms for money laundering, which this scheme must have included.  But the actual sentence will be driven principally by a few other factors.  First, the federal sentencing guidelines (which are optional, but a starting point of consideration) are based largely by the amount of money involved and the person's criminal history.  There are numerous other guideline factors which are not public.  For example, guidelines can go up when a person supervises others (as the indictment suggests) or down if the conduct is considered "aberrant behavior" (i.e., out of character for the defendant).  And the judge has to consider general sentencing factors (e.g., did the guy endure a difficult life, spend years as a volunteer helping orphans, save anyone from a burning building).  

 

Maybe the biggest unknown is whether he will plead guilty quickly or go to trial? Judges are not supposed to penalize people for going to trial, but the guidelines (which are optional) do exactly that.  

 

And another factor is whether, if he pleads guilty, he can and will make restitution.  

 

Any guess at the sentence based upon the mere public record is pretty worthless, especially without knowing whether the guy has any history of fraud or criminal convictions.    All I can say is that, if he is convicted after a trial, it is a certainty that he will serve years in jail AND will be subject to financial penalties that will seek to enable the recovery of ALL of the money he allegedly obtained from the scheme.  And that financial penalty can be enforced forever.

[ElmerJFudd]

29 minutes ago, Thethirdapple said:

We as humans have found endless methods for exploiting each other for self centered profit, well before “communist regimes” and well after the “corporatist regime”…

 

Not sure that signing up with a service which brands itself as “never going to do something with YOUR content” and then the next year changes its terms of service to let you mnow that your content has been sold to an AI warehouse of shite

 

 

 

PEACE

_
_
_

 For about the last 2 to 3 million years, since evolution blessed us with enough brains to see cause and effect - we’ve been scheming, devising and plotting ways to serve our self interests.  Every system we build, institution we create, eventually suffers from corruption, abuse, cheating.  This happens regardless of the fact that we also can fathom fairness, morality, justice, etc.  We are truly confused creatures.  

[Thethirdapple]

10 minutes ago, cedar said:

This is actually a very complex question, in the federal system.

I fear a massive “punishment” as an overreaction to something so new it feels worse than it may well actually be.

 

Remembering the absurd penalties which were imposed by a “per file mp3 downloaded as a separate count”…

 

 

 

 

PEACE

_
_
_

[ElmerJFudd]

1 minute ago, Thethirdapple said:

I fear a massive “punishment” as an overreaction to something so new it feels worse than it may well actually be.

 

Remembering the absurd penalties which were imposed “per file” mp3 downloaded as a separate count…

 

 

 

 

PEACE

_
_
_

Smith’s scheme appears to be the largest and therefore the one they went after to set the example.  There will likely be others to follow.   In the meanwhile the industry will now have to spend money on tightening up their defense against fraud and pass that cost on to subscribers. 

[ProfD]

4 minutes ago, ElmerJFudd said:

In the meanwhile the industry will now have to spend money on tightening up their defense against fraud and pass that cost on to subscribers. 

The industry didn't lose much money compared to what it makes but they will definitely recover those costs from their customers.😎

[ElmerJFudd]

1 hour ago, ProfD said:

The industry didn't lose much money compared to what it makes but they will definitely recover those costs from their customers.😎

Well the shareholders don’t want to pay for it. 😉

[MathOfInsects]

19 minutes ago, ElmerJFudd said:

Well the shareholders don’t want to pay for it. 😉

Then they should be mad at the company for creating a system that allowed it.

[JoJoB3]

Wrong thread

[Thethirdapple]

12 minutes ago, JoJoB3 said:

Wrong thread

And yet its the perfect post…

 

 

 

 

 

PEACE

_
_
_

[MathOfInsects]

10 minutes ago, JoJoB3 said:

Wrong thread

Where I grew up, the toughest guys would let you know you needed, for your own welfare and continued existence upon our fine planet, to turn and walk away, by saying, calmly and terrifyingly, "Wrong guy." Meaning, you picked the worst option to start shit with, and he just wanted to helpfully and generously let you know that he was about to hurt you forever in your pain place, just, you know, FYI, in case you wanted to rethink your approach with them. Which you did. 

[ElmerJFudd]

7 minutes ago, MathOfInsects said:

Where I grew up, the toughest guys would let you know you needed, for your own welfare and continued existence upon our fine planet, to turn and walk away, by saying, calmly and terrifyingly, "Wrong guy." Meaning, you picked the worst option to start shit with, and he just wanted to helpfully and generously let you know that he was about to hurt you forever in your pain place, just, you know, FYI, in case you wanted to rethink your approach with them. Which you did. 

Those crazy human monkeys giving their prey options! 

[JoJoB3]

11 hours ago, Thethirdapple said:

And yet its the perfect post…

 

 

 

 

 

PEACE

_
_
_

Meant for an 'old farts' thread

[JoJoB3]

12 hours ago, MathOfInsects said:

Where I grew up, the toughest guys would let you know you needed, for your own welfare and continued existence upon our fine planet, to turn and walk away, by saying, calmly and terrifyingly, "Wrong guy." Meaning, you picked the worst option to start shit with, and he just wanted to helpfully and generously let you know that he was about to hurt you forever in your pain place, just, you know, FYI, in case you wanted to rethink your approach with them. Which you did. 

Hi.  What the actual f*** are you talking about?

[Thethirdapple]

Its a new york thing…

 

 

The city so shitty they had to name it twice… 🤫

Down to earth people with a mountain of attitude!

 

PEACE

_
_
_

[J.F.N.]

6 hours ago, JoJoB3 said:

Hi.  What the actual f*** are you talking about?

 

I think it was just free association based on "Wrong thread" and that you did delete your original message... 

[MathOfInsects]

That's correct. I didn't see any original post, just a post in a thread that said, "Wrong thread." Funny in isolation. So it was off to the races from there. 

[ElmerJFudd]

How Spotify views their role and the role of distributors and artists in combating fraud (aka artificial streaming).  
 

https://artists.spotify.com/artificial-streaming

[JoJoB3]

4 hours ago, MathOfInsects said:

That's correct. I didn't see any original post, just a post in a thread that said, "Wrong thread." Funny in isolation. So it was off to the races from there. 

? Still not seeing how "wrong thread" was quotable much less your call to action.  Was it that confusing?
"Wrong thread" because it wasn't for this thread. But you want to further derail someone's (very interesting) thread with your unrelated recent quote and comments.

If this board allowed deletion of posts we wouldn't be here right now and you'd instead be on your 6000th reply of "I can say anything I want, I'm old!".

Reminds me of a quote a bandleader told a whiney, old, guitarist at a soundcheck:  "Why don't you just STFU and play, how about that?".
He was replaced before the 2nd show.

[MathOfInsects]

[MathOfInsects]

1 hour ago, ElmerJFudd said:

How Spotify views their role and the role of distributors and artists in combating fraud (aka artificial streaming).  
 

https://artists.spotify.com/artificial-streaming

Interesting. And yet...the penalties they describe are removal from Spotify and/or making sure those streams don't count against your total.  It does say something about a vague "penalty fee," but at this point I'm sure Our Hero would have been glad for that to be the outcome. It doesn't mention any legal recourse. 

 

Spotify calls it "streaming fraud," but I wonder if @cedar can clarify if that's an actual thing....?

[ElmerJFudd]

22 minutes ago, MathOfInsects said:

Interesting. And yet...the penalties they describe are removal from Spotify and/or making sure those streams don't count against your total.  It does say something about a vague "penalty fee," but at this point I'm sure Our Hero would have been glad for that to be the outcome. It doesn't mention any legal recourse. 

 

Spotify calls it "streaming fraud," but I wonder if @cedar can clarify if that's an actual thing....?

According to Forbes, the charges are financial crimes, not using bots to increase plays - “wire fraud conspiracy, wire fraud and money laundering conspiracy. Each count carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison.”

[cedar]

3 minutes ago, ElmerJFudd said:

According to Forbes, the charges are financial crimes, not using bots to increase plays - “wire fraud conspiracy, wire fraud and money laundering conspiracy. Each count carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison.”

 

Correct.  Colloquially, sometimes prosecutors and media like to give a more specific name to the fraud for public consumption (or as kind of a short-hand way of identifying the nature of the fraud).  But "streaming fraud" is not an official crime.  Indeed, Congress probably never contemplated a fraud of this nature.    

[MathOfInsects]

Thank you (both). OK, so @ElmerJFudd is onto it with the potential tax evasion aspect. It's less about the streaming than about what happened to (and with the money) after he got it. He got Al Caponed. 

[ElmerJFudd]

18 minutes ago, MathOfInsects said:

Thank you (both). OK, so @ElmerJFudd is onto it with the potential tax evasion aspect. It's less about the streaming than about what happened to (and with the money) after he got it. He got Al Caponed. 

Yes, the money trail was elaborate.  In order to avoid detection he falsified identities with financial institutions, moved money between false entities, laundered money, etc. I don’t know if they even need to go the tax evasion route, but without a doubt this income was not reported.  😂 

 

 

[Tom Williams]

On 9/8/2024 at 7:25 AM, ElmerJFudd said:

Bank fraud, wire fraud etc. is a crime in our society that’s long established.  Robin Hood steals from the rich to give to the poor.  Stealing was a crime in his society even if from the perspective of the poor his actions had justification or moral vagueness.  

Lest we forget: the scant historical references to Robin Hood document him as a plain old robber and murderer. 

[ProfD]

2 hours ago, ElmerJFudd said:

According to Forbes, the charges are financial crimes, not using bots to increase plays - “wire fraud conspiracy, wire fraud and money laundering conspiracy. Each count carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison.”

The guy might end up getting 2 years for each count to run concurrently.

 

He would do 19 months or less for good behavior in a low security facility with full privileges including internet access.

 

Then, he might give back $7 million in restitution. That leaves him with $3 million when he returns to society.

 

Of course, they'll force him to get a job working at Best Buy for 3-6 months before he can go back to his life with $3 million in the bank.😁😎

[stoken6]

10 hours ago, ElmerJFudd said:

According to Forbes, the charges are financial crimes, not using bots to increase plays - “wire fraud conspiracy, wire fraud and money laundering conspiracy. Each count carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison.”

 

9 hours ago, MathOfInsects said:

Thank you (both). OK, so @ElmerJFudd is onto it with the potential tax evasion aspect. It's less about the streaming than about what happened to (and with the money) after he got it. He got Al Caponed. 

Thank you from me also. I saw immediately how this action would breach Spotify's terms of service. I didn't see how it was a criminal act? But if he's hiding the earnings from the tax authorities that's a legit crime. 

 

Right thread.

 

Cheers, Mike.

[TommyRude]

There’s been a update on this story:

 

Wire services:  On Tuesday, September 10, 2024, the purported music fraudster has reached a settlement with Spotify to provide restitution.  The fraudster will serve no jail time, but will serve 2 years supervised probation.  The fraudster will provide restitution by creating fake TV shows which will stream on fake channels.  In an ironic twist, the fraudster will be allowed to repurpose his fraudulent AI music as soundtracks for the fake TV shows.  The fake channels will be hosted by Comcast, who will make the payments.  Because everyone hates Comcast, the presiding judge agreed with the restitution scheme.