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.

    • Vent@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      The headline focuses on the wrong thing. Making a bunch of crappy songs and uploading the to Spotify and other streaming services is perfectly legal, AI or not.

      The illegal part is that he created lots and lots of fake accounts that constantly streamed his songs and masked them to look like authentic listens. So much so that he was making $110k per month. That is straight-up fraud, which is what he was arrested for.

      It has nothing to do with AI, but that makes more people click on the article.

      • Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        It’s not money laundering, they were creating fake engagement and getting advertising revenue out of it.

        • HappyTimeHarry@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          getting bots to fake engagement for a profit is money laundering, believe it or not. its a pretty vague crime that basically amounts to getting paid in a way thats deceptive.

          • Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Hmm. If that’s true, the legal definition and the definition we typically use are very different.

        • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Could be if the revenue was paid out to non existing aliasses and then transferred to himself.

          But getting paid royalties directly by Spotify would not need to be laundered as it’s legit money for the irs.