Spotify and several major record labels, including UMG, Sony, and Warner, secured a $322 million default judgment against the unknown operators of Anna’s Archive. The shadow library failed to appear in court and briefly released millions of tracks that were scraped from Spotify via BitTorrent. In addition to the monetary penalty, a permanent injunction required domain registrars and other parties to suspend the site’s domain names.
AI still out here taking everything. Only the corporations can steal. Maybe they didn’t like that it was then given to people for free, instead sold again.
Maybe they didn’t like that it was then given to people for free
Yeah, I mean, it’s mostly that.
In addition to the damages award, Rakoff entered a permanent worldwide injunction covering ten Anna’s Archive domains
Bahaha, Fuck Off. The world doesn’t recognize your authority.
Watch how many will bend the knee
does this set precedence for online platforms to sue AI platforms for all the data collection? /s
That was quick. This took a few months, while artists have been dealing with AI stealing their work for years now.
Always remember that, in the eyes of the law, the real crime is being poor.
They did it guys!!! Piracy no more /s
Only billionaires and friends allowed
Gee I wonder why warehouses keep catching fires lately…
So, this sentence says it’s actually illegal to download copyrighted material through shadow libraries, I get it and now I wonder what could this mean for Meta’s AI case?
They don’t care and will continue to do it.
Same
So uhm, what’s the new name? Asking for a friend.
They used a neat trick and just spelled the first name backwards! annA instead of Anna!
Just go to the wiki and look up the domains in the right.
“Scraped from Spotify via Bitorrent” OK. That’s not how that works.
briefly released millions of tracks that were scraped from Spotify via BitTorrent.
That’s just an awkward sentence construction but it makes sense: they released track via Bittorrent. The tracks were scraped from Spotify.
I sold my car that was purchased from a dealership via private party sale.
I charged my laptop that normally accepts 100W via a 20W phone charger.
I would’ve used a “which” phrase with commas to avoid the confusion, but the sentence as written is valid and makes sense.
Poorly worded
I think it’s just poor wording. It says they released tracks that were scraped from Spotify via BitTorrent. I think the punctuation and sentence structure is awkward. I think what they were trying to say was more along the lines of “they scraped millions of tracks from Spotify, and released them via BitTorrent.”
Still not technically correct, because you don’t release things via BitTorrent. But it at least clarifies that the songs were first scraped, and then released via torrent.
Actually, for a while Spotify did use the BitTorrent protocol for content delivery. So this isn’t too far-fetched.
deleted by creator
…briefly released millions of tracks, scraped from Spotify, via Bittorrent.
Would have worked better with commas, but makes sense?
Funny, the statute $2500 should be for the circumvention act, which was likely singular, not per file obtained during or as a result of the act. And the $150k is ridiculous in and of itself, even if for all files obtained. What a strange world we live in.
Spotify built a system of control in order to profit a few at a cost to many, perhaps everyone else.
Someone broke that system in order to benefit many, possibly at the cost of some of their ability to profit from their system of control–if they didn’t lose customers, or prospective customers, they didn’t experience any financial loss, or a loss in their ability to maintain their system of control (which is still very much in place and working).
Either way, nobody was hurt.
But the person who acted selflessly to benefit of society in general is punished.
Because… We, as a society, celebrate and work effortlessly to maintain complex systems of abuse in order to satisfy our greed or the greed of others. All despite being taught in school not to lie to and bully each other, and to share with and care for each other.
As a species: We are bat shit fucking crazy!
No, to enable (in the addiction sense) the greed of others. Not “satisfy.” Because it can never be satisfied: they will take and take and take and take until there is nothing left, and still demand more.
Lawyers be making money filing lawsuits against ghosts. Happy hunting boys.
I hope every music industry executive gets run over by a Mack Truck.
Nah, thats too quick
Going in reverse up a hill with a full load
Fuck Spotify and their ICE recruitment ad bullshit.
A default judgement just gives Spotify some leverage to try to collect money, property, and get injunctions. But as we know from the pirate bay cases, that’s a losing whack-a-mole battle long term.
But it does make life a bit harder for Anna’s archive unless they show up to fight back, which they probably won’t.
Why? Is there anything good in there?
Is this a reverse play? Does that ruling leave open the door to similar rulings against llms? Why did they offer no contest at all?
Why did they offer no contest at all?
Likely because contesting it would require doxxing themselves. The site’s admins survive on anonymity. And you can’t exactly be anonymous in court filings.
There’s also nothing saying they are even in the US. Or at this point even human
