6 ms·

It wasn't clear in the article. Is the idea that they were inflating play counts of songs related to the owners so that they could suppress the royalties paid

It wasn't clear in the article. Is the idea that they were inflating play counts of songs related to the owners so that they could suppress the royalties paid to other artists, with the idea that they each get a piece of a pie based on number of plays?

lb1lf 8y ago
That it is; they are being investigated for violating section 371 of the Norwegian penal code, which reads: Section 371.Fraud A penalty of a fine or imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years shall be applied to any person who with intent to obtain an illicit gain for himself/herself or others a) causes, strengthens or exploits a mistaken belief and thereby deceives someone into doing or omitting to do something by which someone suffers a loss or risks a loss, or b) makes use of false or incomplete information, modifies data or a computer system, uses a credit or debit card which belongs to another person, or otherwise illicitly affects the result of automated data processing, thereby causing someone a loss or risk of loss. Specifically, Tidal are accused of violating paragraph b) above.
- zaroth 8y ago
  Whose loss is it to inflate a stream count?
  - MereInterest 8y ago
    You and I jointly get $10/month, to be split according to our stream counts. We each get 100 views/month, so we both take home $5/month. Now, I start lying, and saying that I am actually receiving 900 views/month. With 90% of the views, I take home $9/month, leaving only $1/month to you. I have fraudulently stolen $4/month from you.
    - zaroth 8y ago
      Thanks, this makes sense if royalty payments are a revenue share based on stream share, and not a per-stream fee.
      - enjikaka 8y ago
        Streams in the industry are payed out according to the pro-rata model, not the user-centric one. TIDAL, when being WiMP, helped with studies on this: https://musically.com/2015/08/18/user-centric-streaming-payouts-artists/ https://musically.com/2015/08/18/user-centric-streaming-payo...
  - askver 8y ago
    If you and your buddies own the service, and you order the nerds over in Norway/Northpole to inflate the play counts of you and your buddies's music so that you don't have to pay other randos so much money: all of the other artists.
askver 8y ago
Yes. Insert half-serious joke about the the business ethics of a self-confessed former drug dealer (https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2013/11/jay-z-beyonce-blue-ivy-cover-story https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2013/11/jay-z-beyonce-b...) here.
- maccio92 8y ago
  But Obama brought him to the white house! I thought he was a nice guy
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

lb1lf 8y ago

That it is; they are being investigated for violating section 371 of the Norwegian penal code, which reads: Section 371.Fraud A penalty of a fine or imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years shall be applied to any person who with intent to obtain an illicit gain for himself/herself or others a) causes, strengthens or exploits a mistaken belief and thereby deceives someone into doing or omitting to do something by which someone suffers a loss or risks a loss, or b) makes use of false or incomplete information, modifies data or a computer system, uses a credit or debit card which belongs to another person, or otherwise illicitly affects the result of automated data processing, thereby causing someone a loss or risk of loss. Specifically, Tidal are accused of violating paragraph b) above.

zaroth 8y ago
Whose loss is it to inflate a stream count?
- MereInterest 8y ago
  You and I jointly get $10/month, to be split according to our stream counts. We each get 100 views/month, so we both take home $5/month. Now, I start lying, and saying that I am actually receiving 900 views/month. With 90% of the views, I take home $9/month, leaving only $1/month to you. I have fraudulently stolen $4/month from you.
  - zaroth 8y ago
    Thanks, this makes sense if royalty payments are a revenue share based on stream share, and not a per-stream fee.
    - enjikaka 8y ago
      Streams in the industry are payed out according to the pro-rata model, not the user-centric one. TIDAL, when being WiMP, helped with studies on this: https://musically.com/2015/08/18/user-centric-streaming-payouts-artists/ https://musically.com/2015/08/18/user-centric-streaming-payo...
- askver 8y ago
  If you and your buddies own the service, and you order the nerds over in Norway/Northpole to inflate the play counts of you and your buddies's music so that you don't have to pay other randos so much money: all of the other artists.

askver 8y ago

Yes. Insert half-serious joke about the the business ethics of a self-confessed former drug dealer (https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2013/11/jay-z-beyonce-blue-ivy-cover-story https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2013/11/jay-z-beyonce-b...) here.

maccio92 8y ago
But Obama brought him to the white house! I thought he was a nice guy

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]