this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2024
1091 points (99.0% liked)

Technology

60036 readers
2870 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] shani66@ani.social 59 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (5 children)

Lawsuit, sure, but is it actually illegal?

[–] FahrenheitGhost@lemmy.world 58 points 3 months ago (2 children)

People who are not part of the wealthy elite stealing profits is illegal. Doesn't matter what the method was.

[–] futatorius@lemm.ee 21 points 3 months ago (3 children)

And yet Xitter, Farcebook and similar platforms still publish their stats as if all their users are real human beings. So why isn't that fraud?

[–] shuzuko@midwest.social 22 points 3 months ago

Because it's only fraud if a normal person makes money from it, duh 🤪

[–] dabster291@lemmy.zip 14 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

People who are ~~not~~ part of the wealthy elite stealing profits is ~~il~~legal.

[–] Summzashi@lemmy.one 3 points 3 months ago

Plausible deniability is the answer.

[–] xenoclast@lemmy.world 12 points 3 months ago

This is the truth. He would have been fine if he was super rich

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 20 points 3 months ago

Bot listening is probably fraud.

[–] Silentiea@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Probably against the TOS, though, meaning the money paid was never owed, could get it into fraud

[–] NikkiDimes@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

That's still civil. I think this is just a case of fraud plain and simple.

[–] jwmgregory@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

uh, yes? it's at the least fraud fs? the article says the doj is charging mike smith with three money laundering charges and one count of wire fraud. obviously the wire fraud charge comes from an argument that smith defrauded the distribution companies into illegitimately paying out royalties for false streams. note that the artificial intelligence solution only comes into the argument for the purposes of how he committed the crime, it really had nothing to do with the crime itself, at least intrinsically. if you read the press release from the doj, you can see that they make a pretty airtight argument that, quote:

SMITH made numerous misrepresentations to the Streaming Platforms in furtherance of the fraud scheme. For example, SMITH repeatedly lied to the Streaming Platforms when he used false names and other information to create the Bot Accounts and when he agreed to abide by terms and conditions that prohibited streaming manipulation. SMITH also deceived the Streaming Platforms by making it appear as if legitimate users were in control of the Bot Accounts and streaming music when, in fact, the Bot Accounts were hard coded to stream SMITH’s music billions of times. SMITH also caused the Streaming Platforms to falsely report billions of streams of his music, even though SMITH knew that those streams were in fact caused by the Bot Accounts rather than real human listeners.

SMITH’s hundreds of thousands of AI-generated songs were streamed by his Bot Accounts billions of times, which allowed him to fraudulently obtain more than $10 million in royalties.

it is not illegal to lie. it is absolutely illegal to lie for the purposes of financial gain. sure, i'm not disagreeing that what he did could not somehow be construed as something of a robin hood character arc (even tho he most certainly did this for the purposes of his own personal enrichment). but he almost definitely is guilty of the wire fraud charge and i do have a strong feeling, based on the prosecutorial level of this case, the involvement of a specialized division of the fbi, and his purported co-conspirators; that the money laundering charges are ironclad as well. frankly, i'm hoping his co-conspirators actually do end up going to trial and we get to learn what the company that aided in his fraud actually was. on fucking god it'd be one thing if he ran this grift machine for a little while, paid off a lil bit of his debts and all, maybe even lived off of it. but to steal $10 million fucking dollars with it, even when he knew he was committing fraud and had to explicitly hide his criminal activity??? no shit the fbi was hot on your trail. what an absolutely, colossal dipshit michael smith must be. i respect the ingenuity but it is so blindingly obvious that 10 million dollars was egregiously too many times to press a "free money button" you just invented in a capitalist autocratic hellscape.

QUICK EDIT: i do just wanna say also i did not downvote u/shani66 and i just wanted to contribute to discussion. just noticed after i posted someone had downvoted them which is kinda goofy of whoever that is.

[–] DaddysLittleSlut@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Just wanted to add something. Lying for Financial gain isn’t illegal it’s how you do it. Like people lie for Financial gain all the time.

[–] jwmgregory@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

that’s fair, my absolute statement doesn’t reflect the exclusive way anti fraud laws are written. you certainly might find and successfully exploit legal ways to lie for financial gain, but at best it’s unethical and at worst you’ll have to defend why your deceit isn’t criminal fraud in a lawsuit. it kind of depends on who you piss off the most, imo.

[–] DaddysLittleSlut@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

I would not just say unethical. You have to consider multiple facets and situations. While yes it may not be best. Sometimes they have to feed children or otherwise. To put it simply most things aren’t black and white.

[–] Lev_Astov@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

According to the article, they're going for multiple counts of money laundering and wire fraud with 20 years each.