AI, Bot Farms, and Innocent Indie Victims: The Dark Side of Music Streaming Scams

The music industry is currently facing a struggle, particularly regarding the operations of streaming services, with unsuspecting indie artists caught in the crossfire.

Streaming platforms like Spotify and Apple Music are inundated with AI-generated tracks, which are cheap and easy to produce. In April, Deather estimated that 20,000 fully AI-created tracks—making up 18% of new releases—were being consumed daily, nearly double the number from January. Scammers often employ bots, AI, or even humans to loop these fake songs repeatedly to generate revenue, while some exploit upload services to place counterfeit songs on legitimate artist pages, siphoning off royalties.

Spotify has begun penalizing the most egregious offenders, with the statement that it is utilizing “significant engineering resources and investigations into the detection, mitigation, and removal of artificial streaming activities.” Meanwhile, Apple Music contends that “less than 1% of all streams are manipulated.” While this might sound reassuring, the global streaming business generated $20.4 billion (according to IFPI), indicating that hundreds of millions of dollars could be lost annually to fraudulent operators.

One significant issue arises from the drastically lowered entry barriers for musicians; uploading a song to streaming platforms is now much simpler than producing CDs and vinyl. However, this ease has similarly afforded fraudsters an easier path. Though the industry has declared war on this manipulation, the automatic detection systems can mistakenly flag innocent artists, leading to their music being taken down.




Spotify’s headquarters in New York. Photo: John Nacion Imaging/Shutterstock

Darren Owen, COO of music streaming service Fuga, identified a “surge in streaming scams” spreading throughout the industry since around 2021.

Utilizing AI and machine learning, FUGA assigns a “severity score” to streaming patterns and distinguishes “nonhuman listening habits” to uncover fraudulent activities. “I wouldn’t listen to the same song on different devices at once,” Owen states. Countries like India, Vietnam, Thailand, and certain areas in Eastern Europe have been flagged as hotspots for click-farm operations utilizing low-wage labor. “It’s also been revealed that organized crime is involved,” he adds.

It’s not just platforms like Germany’s Pimpyourfollower.de, which was taken down following a court order. Similar services in Canada and Brazil are also facing scrutiny from record industry trade organizations for inflating streaming numbers artificially. Universal Music Group (UMG), the world’s largest record label, has allegedly conspired to boost play counts for Kendrick Lamar’s diss track “None Like Us.”

The Guardian has spoken with several artists who find themselves in the firing line of this manipulation war.

Darren Hemmings, managing director and musician at the music marketing company Motive Unknown, reported that a recent EP saw a track’s plays spike over 1,000—an indication of manipulation. “I don’t blame them for concluding that,” he says, but adds, “it’s very much like being judged, tried, and executed all at once.” He insists he did not manipulate his streams but couldn’t identify the cause aside from climbing popularity among real listeners.

The Northern Irish rock band Final 13 experienced their music being removed from streaming services due to a sudden spike of tens of thousands of plays. They believe this surge resulted from airplay on Radio 1, yet concluded their distributors were caught up in automated manipulation. “It’s really tough for any artist to prove they didn’t [manipulate streams], but it’s even more challenging for Spotify to justify what they did,” remarks their drummer, Doubes. “[They] take it down, and that’s the end of it.”




Matthew Whiteside at night… Photo: Julie Houden

Indie artist Adam J. Morgan, known as Naked Burner, earned over 10,000 streams in a week, likely due to his music being featured in TikTok videos, but was flagged as suspicious by distributor Routenote. “I hadn’t done anything wrong, and they offered no evidence,” he states, suspecting that it was simply due to an overly sensitive algorithm. “I spent the weekend trying to understand the problem, but Spotify informed me that my music wasn’t flagged at all.” Routenote did not respond to a request for comment.

Such takedowns can disrupt musicians, hinder marketing efforts, and ultimately affect earnings. Matthew Whiteside, who heads TNW Music Label, has faced claims of artificial streaming for three different albums. He noted that TNW Music tracks had been included in a controlled playlist. “It didn’t make sense based on genre. My distributor said I could resubmit the album for $40 each time, but that’s not feasible without assurance of success.”

“Streaming generally favors smaller acts and niche genres,” he observes. “I’d be thrilled to get 1,000 streams a month with an album.” Consequently, paying to re-upload an album can be beyond the release budget.

Deezer claims to be leading the way in implementing fraud detection mechanisms. “We monitor various metrics to help our algorithms determine user authenticity,” says Thibault Roucou, reporting director at the company’s royalties department. “When we initiate a takedown, we manually review the situation to ensure it’s a serious issue.”

Regrettably, many systems that execute takedowns often presume guilt, and the appeal processes can be so complicated that many small acts, already struggling, simply give up. Levina, who represented Germany in the Eurovision Song Contest in 2017, experienced her music being removed from streaming platforms without any warning. “Appealing against them is nearly impossible,” she sighs.




Levina is the chairman of the Artist Council in the Association of High-profile Artists. Photo: Sam Rockman

She is also the chair of the Artists Council within the Feature Artists Coalition, working to establish “minimum standards for what distributors should provide.” She suggests implementing a traffic light warning system, allowing artists the opportunity to present their defense or rectify issues.

Streaming platforms and distributors assert that the focus is on containment rather than complete removal. However, Owen notes that the current issue isn’t solely about scammers perpetrating large-scale manipulations but involves subtle adjustments to numerous tracks to avoid detection.

For Hemmings, this situation could result in a two-tier streaming landscape where smaller acts abandon mainstream platforms. “This might lead to the conclusion that focusing on alternative revenue streams is a wiser choice for many within the independent music community.”

Source: www.theguardian.com

Innocent: The Rise, Fall, and Resurrection of Tech Mogul Mike Lynch’s Fortune

“This is a landmark day in Autonomy’s history,” Mike Lynch declared in a press release on August 18, 2011, as he announced the sale of his software company, Autonomy, to Hewlett-Packard for $11 billion.

June 6, 2024, will be an even more significant date for Lynch.

After nearly 13 tumultuous years and a drawn-out trial in the heart of Silicon Valley, Lynch, once known as the “British Bill Gates,” has been cleared of fraud charges. The verdict marks a stunning reversal of fortune for the entrepreneur.

Lynch said Thursday he was “overjoyed” at his acquittal. “The truth has finally prevailed,” his lawyers declared.

He is now due to return to Britain, but the fight to clear his name continues. HP nearly won a civil lawsuit against Lynch and another Autonomy head, Sushoban Hussain, in London two years ago. The company is seeking $4 billion in damages. Lynch had previously said he would appeal the decision.

By all accounts, the acquisition was a disaster. Just five weeks after it was announced, HP’s CEO, who had signed the deal, was fired. Lynch left Autonomy less than a year later. The lucrative acquisition briefly cemented Lynch’s reputation as Britain’s most successful tech mogul. Its real legacy was more than a decade of bitter legal battles.

In November 2012, HP’s new management wrote down the value of Autonomy by $8.8 billion, alleging “significant” accounting irregularities, disclosure deficiencies, and “plain misrepresentations” prior to the acquisition. After years of investigations and legal proceedings on both sides of the Atlantic, a US federal grand jury indicted Lynch on criminal charges in November 2018. After the civil proceedings were concluded, the UK agreed to Lynch’s extradition.

His legal troubles grew last year. Having nearly lost a British civil lawsuit, Lynch also lost an appeal against his extradition in the UK High Court. A few weeks later, he was on a plane to California.

The trial in San Francisco has been a tough test for Lynch, who has been fighting to avoid extradition to the U.S. to face more than a dozen fraud charges. Federal prosecutors have a horrific record of convictions, forcing Lynch’s defense team to adjust their defense ahead of the trial.

From the start of the saga, Lynch has maintained that Autonomy’s collapse was the result of mismanagement of valuable HP assets, not fraud, but rather the failure of HP to provide evidence to support that claim, but U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer, who presided over the case, has barred Lynch’s lawyers from presenting evidence to support that claim.

Failing to focus on the post-acquisition situation, Lynch’s defense was based on three main arguments: first, that running a company like Autonomy is much more complicated than the prosecution would have the jury believe, second, that Lynch is a very different person to the person he has been portrayed to be, and third, that HP rushed to conduct its due diligence and close the deal.

One of Lynch’s lawyers, Reid Weingarten, declared on the first day of the trial that the government’s case was “black and white,” “and this trial is going to show that that’s not how the world works. The world works in shades of gray. The world is complicated.”

Life is “delicate and messy”, Lynch told the court, suggesting that his trial is effectively “like peering through the door to watch sausages being made. The thing you have to bear in mind is that if you take a microscope to a clean kitchen, you’re going to find germs. And I think Autonomy is no exception.”

Prosecutors tried to portray Lynch as an intimidating, ruthless businessman responsible for every aspect of the Autonomy empire. Jurors heard about the piranha tank in the atrium of the company’s headquarters and conference rooms named after James Bond villains.

Lynch said he found it “surreal” to hear government witnesses testify about many discussions and decisions he was unaware of. He said he delegated work that was outside his expertise and spent “about 30 percent” of his time at Autonomy in his later years spending time with his family and pursuing other hobbies.

“I believe the more you know about him, the better it is for us,” Weingarten told jurors before Lynch’s testimony.

Skip Newsletter Promotions


Privacy Notice: The newsletter may contain information about charities, online advertising and externally funded content. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect your privacy on our website and Google. privacy policy and terms of service Apply.

Prosecutors said Mr Lynch had “half a billion reasons” to commit the fraud – one for every pound he claimed to have made from HP’s acquisition of Autonomy – but Mr Lynch said the company wanted to remain independent.

Autonomy is one of the stars of London’s FTSE 100 stock index and is still in the process of acquiring itself. Lynch says he only started considering the idea after meeting with HP executives at a luxury home in the English countryside. It was the 64% premium on Autonomy’s shares that ultimately convinced the company to accept the deal.

Lynch argued that HP was determined to rapidly transform itself from a hardware maker into a software giant. press release It was only when it was released that the company announced it was buying his company, a process he recalled on the stand as “total chaos.”

Prosecutors argued that HP’s handling of the proceedings was irrelevant: They alleged that Lynch orchestrated a massive fraud over years and that Autonomy used a variety of accounting tricks to inflate sales growth.

But Lynch stressed that HP was “not at all” misled about Autonomy’s value. A California jury believed Lynch and dismissed the case, which the U.S. government had detailed, calling more than 30 witnesses.

Six years ago, a jury in the same court came to a different conclusion about one of Lynch’s closest business partners. Hussain, who served as Autonomy’s chief financial officer, was convicted of conspiracy, wire fraud and securities fraud in connection with the deal in 2018. He was released from a U.S. prison in January after serving a five-year sentence.

Lynch, who was awarded an OBE at the height of his career and served as an adviser to the British prime minister, spent much of the year before his trial under effective house arrest, guarded around the clock by two armed guards, and the threat of more than 20 years in prison loomed large if convicted.

The businessman left court a free man on Thursday. “I look forward to returning to the UK and getting back to what I love most – my family and innovating in my field,” he said.

Another important day.

Source: www.theguardian.com