this post was submitted on 30 Jan 2026
156 points (98.8% liked)

DeclineIntoCensorship

996 readers
19 users here now

founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
top 45 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ToxicWaste@lemmy.cafe 1 points 1 day ago

who sues spotify about not paying artists?

[–] Atherel@lemmy.dbzer0.com 98 points 3 days ago

Theft? So there's no music on Spotify anymore?

[–] Pavidus@lemmy.world 113 points 4 days ago (3 children)

So, just out of curiosity, how is this any different than the corporations stealing literally everything to train ai?

[–] galoisghost@aussie.zone 70 points 3 days ago (1 children)

That should be their defence. “We’re just training our AI bro”

If it works. It works. If it doesn’t, maybe it sets a legal precedent.

[–] murmelade@lemmy.ml 10 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Anna sues ChatGPT for $13 trillion in ultimate legal ouroboros

[–] Nikelui@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

To close the circle you need OpenAI to sue Spotify.

[–] murmelade@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 days ago

"Hey Sam, I hear Spotify is making bank with all your AI generated music!"

[–] CallMeAnAI@lemmy.world 13 points 3 days ago

It's not. You are both stealing from each other while screeching, it's just a copy not stealing.

[–] jimmy90@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

at the moment i think distributing and selling content is very much frowned upon

consuming it is not, and once injested it is no longer copy-writable

this should probably change

[–] jimmy90@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

also i did ask an ai

The total global data storage is projected to exceed 200 zettabytes by 2025

what do you think we're going to do with it? holiday photos?

[–] bluesheep@sh.itjust.works 59 points 3 days ago (2 children)

In 2025, the world's gross domestic product amounted to approximately 117.2 trillion U.S. dollars, compared with 111.1 trillion in 2024.

So they're suing for roughly 10% of the world's GDP if the site I linked is to be believed. That's gotta be a joke, right?

[–] Vintor@retrolemmy.com 36 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] bluesheep@sh.itjust.works 13 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Yeah I heard about that one. Like, what's the point of these lawsuits? Making it look scary? Cause to me it looks like they don't have a clue what they're asking for

[–] Bakkoda@sh.itjust.works 8 points 3 days ago

Litigation is expensive and the courts aren't exactly a welcoming place nowadays for the little guy/girl.

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

There are statutory damages of $750 to $30,000 per work assigned to copyright infringement. Under certain circumstances, the courts may lower this amount to $200 per work, or increase it to $150,000.

Plaintiffs multiplied the number of works Anna's Archive has claimed to have acquired times $150,000 to come up with their number.

[–] bluesheep@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 days ago

I see, that makes a bit more sense. I guess it's kind of the same as asking the highest price you think you can get when putting something up for auction? Cause I refuse to believe there is anyone who thinks that 10% of global GDP is a realistic figure lmao

[–] friend_of_satan@lemmy.world 37 points 3 days ago (1 children)

But what if it was Anna's archive dot ai?

[–] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 2 points 2 days ago

Then it would be fine.

[–] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 28 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Music licensing is the most fucked up greediest maneuvering I have ever witnessed, and I've bought used cars. I remember buying a box set of "Bonanza" TV series and, when I started to watch, the iconic "Bonanza" theme was replaced by some surf-guitar sounding intro. Fuck music licensing! Go Napster! Simple rule, once the person who wrote the song/piece dies then BOOM!...public domain. What's next? Let's sue all of the travelling bands who play cover tunes.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago

The Drew Carey show isn't easily streamed in full because of music licensing. It's a bummer for sure.

[–] Evil_Shrubbery@thelemmy.club 37 points 3 days ago
[–] Donjuanme@lemmy.world 42 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Spotify started as a place you could upload your "own" ripped music to, and then listen to it from anywhere.

Fuck them for moving away from that model, and fuck them for pulling this shit, and fuck them for giving Rogan however much they gave him to spout his bullshit

[–] some_kind_of_guy@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Same with Google Play Music. But they put the kibosh on that and merged it with YouTube so that today your high quality audio files show up next to poor quality slop videos uploaded by randoms.

Yea it was really annoying that you couldn't just limit it to your uploads. Any search or change of filters would just end up adding results from the rest of yt music. In then end I've moved over to jellyfin with finamp.

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 5 points 2 days ago

Annas Archive should just host a LLM, then it's fine.

[–] JonEFive@midwest.social 37 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Might as well be "a million bajillion dollars!!!!"

Hey! You stole my other peoples art and allowed people to make copies! We're so damaged that we are making record profits for the shareholders!

[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 16 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Anna's archive should have trained an AI model with it instead...

...and then produce AI music that they put on their own platform as a way to syphon off royalty fees.

[–] Railcar8095@lemmy.world 13 points 3 days ago (1 children)

So, those 4 companies argue that without Anna's archive they would be the to 4 largest companies in the world?

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 3 points 3 days ago (2 children)

They multiplied the "statutory damages" per work times the number of works alleged to have been infringed. The statutory maximum is $150,000 per work.

[–] Nikelui@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

And they pay how much to the artists per work?

[–] Railcar8095@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

That's a compelling argument, but my version is funnier.

I'm illiterate in US copyright law, so nobody take my comment as anything else than a joke

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 16 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The record labels? Sure. Spotify never owned the music, I don't see how they have standing.

[–] ohulancutash@feddit.uk 4 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Because they charged access fees, and their systems were attacked.

[–] voluble@lemmy.ca 14 points 3 days ago

So in a sense, shouldn't artists be suing Spotify and 3 main major record labels for 13 trillion dollars?

[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 13 points 3 days ago

Won't someone please think of the rentier capitalist billionaires?

[–] Zombie@feddit.uk 2 points 3 days ago
[–] Zier@fedia.io 10 points 3 days ago (1 children)

"all the world's commercial recordings" ??? Fuck off. There is no way that they have all of the out of print recordings from every label on Earth.

[–] roserose56@lemmy.zip 7 points 3 days ago (1 children)

They almost do! It was posted some weeks ago.

[–] Zier@fedia.io 1 points 3 days ago

They can't possibly have all the out of print things. Record companies hold that stuff back to force new music sales. And some of the recordings get re-released under "Special Markets" editions. But there is a vast chunk of out of print that never comes back to the public.

[–] cristian64@reddthat.com 10 points 3 days ago

Where is the archive?

[–] Feyd@programming.dev 6 points 3 days ago

Haven't they only actually released the metadata? (So far)

[–] jackmaoist@hexbear.net 4 points 3 days ago

Isn't it based in Russia?