top 45 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 148 points 9 months ago (8 children)

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

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 101 points 9 months ago (4 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    Anna sues ChatGPT for $13 trillion in ultimate legal ouroboros

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    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

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 111 points 9 months ago

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

  • source
  • [–] 70 points 9 months ago (5 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?

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 43 points 9 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 11 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 9 months 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

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 65 points 9 months ago (2 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

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 48 points 9 months ago (1 child)

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

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 48 points 9 months ago (1 child)

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

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 40 points 9 months ago (2 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.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago

    You dont need a mechanical license to play a cover song live but the venues should be paying the PROs performing rights organizations or they can get sued. Small establishments get sued all the time by companies like ASCAP and BMI because of this.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 36 points 9 months ago
    [–] 24 points 9 months ago (4 children)

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

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 9 months ago (3 children)

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

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 9 months ago (1 child)

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

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 9 months ago (2 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.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    They almost do! It was posted some weeks ago.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 9 months 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 9 months ago

    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!

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 9 months ago

    Where is the archive?

  • source
  • [–] 18 points 9 months ago (3 children)

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

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 9 months 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 9 months ago

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

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago

    who sues spotify about not paying artists?

  • source