So, just out of curiosity, how is this any different than the corporations stealing literally everything to train ai?
this post was submitted on 30 Jan 2026
156 points (98.8% liked)
DeclineIntoCensorship
1187 readers
76 users here now
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
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.
Anna sues ChatGPT for $13 trillion in ultimate legal ouroboros
To close the circle you need OpenAI to sue Spotify.
"Hey Sam, I hear Spotify is making bank with all your AI generated music!"
It's not. You are both stealing from each other while screeching, it's just a copy not stealing.
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
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?
Theft? So there's no music on Spotify anymore?
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?
No, and it isn't the first time the industry did this, by far: https://www.businessinsider.com/riaa-claims-limewire-owes-trillions-2012-5
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
Litigation is expensive and the courts aren't exactly a welcoming place nowadays for the little guy/girl.
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.
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
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
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.
But what if it was Anna's archive dot ai?
Then it would be fine.
Might as well be "a million bajillion dollars!!!!"
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.
The Drew Carey show isn't easily streamed in full because of music licensing. It's a bummer for sure.
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.
The record labels? Sure. Spotify never owned the music, I don't see how they have standing.
Because they charged access fees, and their systems were attacked.
So in a sense, shouldn't artists be suing Spotify and 3 main major record labels for 13 trillion dollars?
Won't someone please think of the rentier capitalist billionaires?
Attacked?
So, those 4 companies argue that without Anna's archive they would be the to 4 largest companies in the world?
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.
And they pay how much to the artists per work?
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
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!
Where is the archive?
"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.
They almost do! It was posted some weeks 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.
Haven't they only actually released the metadata? (So far)
Annas Archive should just host a LLM, then it's fine.
Isn't it based in Russia?
who sues spotify about not paying artists?