spotify Sued Over Alleged Tolerance of Bot Streams Inflating Artist Numbers
Spotify is facing a class action lawsuit in California alleging the streaming giant knowingly allows artificial streams generated by bots to inflate artist play counts, a practice that disadvantages smaller musicians and misleads investors. The suit, filed by a US rapper named Eric dwayne Collins, centers on claims that Spotify prioritizes presenting a positive image to shareholders over ensuring fair payouts to artists.
The legal action, first reported by Ars Technica, specifically targets the streaming activity surrounding Canadian rapper Drake, who, according to the lawsuit, has amassed 120 billion stream requests as of September – making him Spotify’s most streamed artist of all time. While the methodology behind these figures remains unclear, as the data is not publicly available, the lawsuit alleges a notable portion of Drake’s streams originate from automated bot networks.
Unnatural Streaming Patterns
According to the filing, the surge in Drake’s album streams over the years has exhibited “very untypical behavior.” Lawyers for Collins point to instances of accounts exclusively playing Drake’s music for as much as 23 hours a day as a clear indicator of bot activity. The lawsuit contends that Spotify was aware of these patterns but deliberately remained inactive, motivated by “economic pressure” to maintain the appearance of high user engagement for investors.
A Flawed Payment System
The lawsuit also highlights longstanding criticisms of Spotify’s payment model. the platform operates on a system where a fixed pool of funds is distributed among artists based on their total stream count. This inherently favors established artists who receive the majority of the revenue,leaving emerging musicians with a smaller share. The introduction of artificially inflated stream counts for popular artists through bot activity further exacerbates this imbalance, diminishing the earnings potential for all other creators.
“When 75 percent of revenues go to 0.1 percent of artists, that speaks volumes,” commented a former government official, referencing a study commissioned by a European federal government that criticized the payment structures of streaming platforms. The study underscored the need for “fair remuneration for music creators, more transparency, and thus an overall democratization of market power.”
Spotify Denies allegations
In a statement provided to Rolling Stone, Spotify vehemently denies the allegations. “Spotify does not benefit in any way from the industry-wide challenge of artificial streaming,” a company spokesperson stated. “We invest heavily in continuously improving, best-in-class systems to combat this problem and secure payouts to artists with effective safeguards, such as removing fake streams, withholding royalties, and imposing penalties.”
The outcome of this class action lawsuit could have far-reaching implications for the music streaming industry, potentially opening the door for thousands of other artists to seek redress for lost revenue and unfair practices. The case raises critical questions about the obligation of streaming platforms to ensure the integrity of their data and the equitable distribution of royalties in an increasingly digital music landscape.
