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.

    • TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Or screwed everyone over too little; if he had screwed everyone for ten billion he would be heralded as a genius.

        • emax_gomax@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          I hate ads but their designed to be shown to people and intentionally using bots to inflate ad views is very clearly fraud. Silicon valley had something similar with bot farms to fake user engagement to take in VC funding. You take money in exchange for some kinda engagement metric which you’re faking.

  • tomkatt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Maybe a stupid question but… what exactly was illegal about this? I’m sure there were ToS or EULAs violated, but what law is he being charged on?

    • hayes_@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      3rd sentence of the article:

      Indicted on three counts involving money laundering and wire fraud, the Charlotte-area man faces a maximum of 20 years per charge.

      If you follow the article to the press release:

      SMITH, 52, of Cornelius, North Carolina, is charged with wire fraud conspiracy, which carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison; wire fraud, which carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison; and money laundering conspiracy, which carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison.

      • GBU_28@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Those are the charges yes, but how is this any different than what all sorts of corporations do

        • aphonefriend@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          The difference is he was a poor trying to pull himself up. Corporations are glorious entities that can do no wrong in American law.

    • DoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      It’s fraud I’m assuming. They fake “plays” for Spotify to reward by sending payment, but these plays were people that did not exist. Spotify was paying for ghosts to essentially steam music

      • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Facebook and other social media corporations use AI bots to generate “views” to inflate their traffic numbers to entice advertisers. They also use bots to piss people off and drive “engagement.”. Which is also fraud.

    • jwmgregory@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        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
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          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
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 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.

  • JIMMERZ@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    He found a flaw in the system and exploited it. Although he didn’t do anything particularly wrong, the tools he used allowed him to do it. Yet, somehow he has to pay the consequences and the companies that made the tools to exploit the system are not liable. Got it.

    • Ruxias@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      America’s darling Jeff Bezos exploited a flaw in his book suppliers policies to gain an unfair edge on competitors in the early days of Amazon. Best business man ever: give him the key to the city and a dick-shaped rocket ship.

      He also got rich daddy and rich friend money to get money for his totally original and non-derivative idea of “selling things online”. Maybe that’s where this guy went wrong? No rich daddy?

      • futatorius@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        The “selling things online” idea had been tried repeatedly before Amazon, and always failed. What Bezos did was find a way to actually (eventually) make money at it. That was a business strategy tour de force that was quite impressively executed. That’s not to say that Bezos is a good employer or a nice person. But it’s often the case that it’s not the originality of the idea that matters, as much as how it’s executed.

        • Ruxias@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Umm… eBay was around before amazon and was largely successful. So no, he isn’t a ground-breaker, nor am I suggesting eBay was either. And yeah you can talk about differences between their platforms but my point still stands.

          All of these types “stand on the shoulders of giants” as they say. Except the giant is the taxpayer money that created the fertile ground that allowed their wealth in the first place. (E.g. the internet) And when they’re sufficiently successful, they love pulling up that ladder you and I and everyone else paid for.

          Private profits, public losses. Same as it ever was.

  • jordanlund@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Not sure how this is a crime… breach of TOS, sure, but a crime?

    What law is being broken here?

    If his fake bands are being paid for bot clicks, that’s a problem for the platforms to figure out. They need to examine their TOS.

    • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Its theft, which is against the law to do against a company or person. Its similar to trading in empty boxes at GameStop or sending back boxes full of rocks to amazon.

      Although most people seem to just pick a side based on whether they think that company should exist or not.

      • LinusSexTips@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        There are far too many loopholes for me not to hate companies be they small or large.

        In Australia, “family trusts” are a sure way to write off a good chunk of your expenses (groceries, fuel and so on) while paying yourself a wage. If you really want you can cook the books taking cash sales for yourself too.

        Don’t forget about “taking” whatever you want from the company, and writing that off as a loss.

        Maybe I should hate people, but in a vacuum people are reasonable, logical and honorable. But once we introduce a “well maybe” or an “but what if I were to purchase fast food and disguise it as my own cooking?” my view of people becomes skewed.

        I guess, I wanted to vent about how fucked everything seems to be and that I feel powerless to do anything about it. GameStop as a company probably deserve the rocks in boxes, Amazon deserve them too, all because people are running those companies.

        I’m not above greed, but I’d like to think / feel that I put out more than I take and it seems quite uncommon in our modern society.

        • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          People will use whatever tools available to them. If their community supports it they will do it publicly, if not they will hide it. Drug use is a great example in some cases.

          If Australia allows people to convert their families to a company just to avoid taxes, then thats on the government to fix, not the people to stop doing.

          As long as there is no UBI there will always be pressure to use all tools available when things get hard.

    • Tire@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Try to overthrow the US government? You can still be president. Break a companies arbitrary TOS? Police are at your door to take you away for a long time.

    • MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      No.

      Music play-farming has been a thing for probably almost a decade by now.

      Spotify divides the huge amount of money they get from subscribers each month, evenly among all the plays during that month.

      Someone figured out ages ago, that since spotify has a free tier, that means that if you can get some tracks on spotify as an artist, you can then create an army of free-tier bot accounts and massively inflate the share of the money you get paid as an “artist”.

      Of course, this comes at the cost of everyone elses legit plays becoming worth less. Its an absolutely disgusting scam and Spotify has been ignoring it happening for years.

      Adding AI generation into the mix is barely an innovation.

      Edit: And if you’re wondering how it works with services that don’t have a free tier, it is done by hijacking peoples real accounts, then having them stream the relevant tracks over and over. Either by stealing entire accounts, or infecting devices that are already logged in with malware that will open the relevant app/website and play the tracks over and over.

      • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Fuck Spotify, they can eat a bag of dicks after renewing Joe cum-guzzling Rogan for $200million. They deserve to have all of their money stolen.

  • Underwaterbob@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Wow. I’m a hobbyist musician. I have ~12 million listens across various streaming services and have made a whopping $45 in the two years since I finally released ~25 years worth of material. (Which is a lot of why it’s my hobby and not a living.)

    I can’t imagine the numbers this guy had to pull off to make that much.

    • MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      No.

      By inflating his own playcounts, the value of each play goes down. All that money he got? Came straight out of the pockets of real artists.