Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Anna's Archive loses $322M Spotify piracy case without a fight

torrentfreak.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 470 posts

Re: Anna's Archive loses $322M Spotify piracy case without a fight

#171

Post by pas »

ikrenji wrote: post #167
echelon wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know how to feel about any of this. First and foremost, I feel like Spotify is scummy. I don't like what they did when they were founded, I don't like what they do to artists. I hate the hyperscalers being in this business (Google, Apple, Amazon) as that's another thing they do that devalues an otherwise healthy market. Bringing in outside business division revenues to dump on another market's prices is ecolo…

people that get their music from AA would never buy it or pay spotify for it, so the "loss" is completely imaginary. same goes for movies, videogames etc

in some sense yes, as long as there are sources of good enough cheaper alternatives millions of people won't ever pay for Spotify (or even use the free version with ads, but the free-with-ads version is in itself a good enough for many many many people), but of course in a vacuum with only Spotify people would probably pay for it!

though the determination of damages is usually completely all over the map (and usually skews high to serve a punitive purpose, though I doubt it has any real deterrent effect).

Re: Anna's Archive loses $322M Spotify piracy case without a fight

#172

Post by arnvald »

echelon wrote: post #163
progbits wrote: post #128

They will never see a single cent from that, AA will continue to rotate domains and nothing was accomplished, except for spotify's legal team which earned easy money arguing against empty chair in court. BTW, you can donate and get faster downloads: https://annas-archive.gl/donate Just donated in honor of this. Up yours spotify!

I don't know how to feel about any of this. First and foremost, I feel like Spotify is scummy. I don't like what they did when they were founded, I don't like what they do to artists. I hate the hyperscalers being in this business (Google, Apple, Amazon) as that's another thing they do that devalues an otherwise healthy market. Bringing in outside business division revenues to dump on another market's prices is ecolo…

I’d love to see a streaming service where my payment goes to artists I listen to.

Spotify pays 70% of their music revenue to publishers based on the total number of listens. All revenue is put together and split based on the global numbers. Which means that niche band I like will get next to nothing. Instead if they account for 50% of my listening time in one month, they should get 35% of what I paid to Spotify that month. Unfortunately big labels will never agree to that.

Re: Anna's Archive loses $322M Spotify piracy case without a fight

#173

Post by tossandthrow »

mercanlIl wrote: post #139
gruez wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it matter? It's not illegal to update an article with a new domain.

Yes it does matter. Users need to know that the updated URL is correct and trustworthy.

This is Wikipedia.

For that type of publishing please use Encyclopedia Britannica.

You will get the url in the 2027 edition on print.

Re: Anna's Archive loses $322M Spotify piracy case without a fight

#174

Post by Cider9986 »

HDThoreaun wrote: post #158
Cider9986 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They have a 500k[1] reward for finding OPSEC failures, so I think they have the basics down. [1] https://software.annas-archive.gl/AnnaArchivist/annas-archiv...

No way Anna’s archive has $500k

Why not? Are they going to scam the person who completes the Google Books bounty for 200k?

Re: Anna's Archive loses $322M Spotify piracy case without a fight

#175

Post by darkwater »

arnvald wrote: post #172
echelon wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know how to feel about any of this. First and foremost, I feel like Spotify is scummy. I don't like what they did when they were founded, I don't like what they do to artists. I hate the hyperscalers being in this business (Google, Apple, Amazon) as that's another thing they do that devalues an otherwise healthy market. Bringing in outside business division revenues to dump on another market's prices is ecolo…

I’d love to see a streaming service where my payment goes to artists I listen to. Spotify pays 70% of their music revenue to publishers based on the total number of listens. All revenue is put together and split based on the global numbers. Which means that niche band I like will get next to nothing. Instead if they account for 50% of my listening time in one month, they should get 35% of what I paid to Spotify that…

But, unless they put some thresholds on minimum listens, isn't basically the same thing what they do and what you propose?

35% of 1 is the same as 0.000000035 of 10.000.000

Re: Anna's Archive loses $322M Spotify piracy case without a fight

#176

Post by collabs »

arnvald wrote: post #172
echelon wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know how to feel about any of this. First and foremost, I feel like Spotify is scummy. I don't like what they did when they were founded, I don't like what they do to artists. I hate the hyperscalers being in this business (Google, Apple, Amazon) as that's another thing they do that devalues an otherwise healthy market. Bringing in outside business division revenues to dump on another market's prices is ecolo…

I’d love to see a streaming service where my payment goes to artists I listen to. Spotify pays 70% of their music revenue to publishers based on the total number of listens. All revenue is put together and split based on the global numbers. Which means that niche band I like will get next to nothing. Instead if they account for 50% of my listening time in one month, they should get 35% of what I paid to Spotify that…

To play the devil's advocate, if we do this, your favorite artist will get paid less if you listen to others using Spotify radio shuffle feature vs if you stay on the artist page and only listen to that one artist?

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Re: Anna's Archive loses $322M Spotify piracy case without a fight

#178

Post by collabs »

darkwater wrote: post #175
arnvald wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d love to see a streaming service where my payment goes to artists I listen to. Spotify pays 70% of their music revenue to publishers based on the total number of listens. All revenue is put together and split based on the global numbers. Which means that niche band I like will get next to nothing. Instead if they account for 50% of my listening time in one month, they should get 35% of what I paid to Spotify that…

But, unless they put some thresholds on minimum listens, isn't basically the same thing what they do and what you propose? 35% of 1 is the same as 0.000000035 of 10.000.000

No, because let's say OP pays USD 10 and listens to only one song one time -- obviously, Linkin Park In the end -- right now, the payout is almost nothing.

With OP proposal, they would get USD 7.

Re: Anna's Archive loses $322M Spotify piracy case without a fight

#179

Post by AlecSchueler »

collabs wrote: post #176
arnvald wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d love to see a streaming service where my payment goes to artists I listen to. Spotify pays 70% of their music revenue to publishers based on the total number of listens. All revenue is put together and split based on the global numbers. Which means that niche band I like will get next to nothing. Instead if they account for 50% of my listening time in one month, they should get 35% of what I paid to Spotify that…

To play the devil's advocate, if we do this, your favorite artist will get paid less if you listen to others using Spotify radio shuffle feature vs if you stay on the artist page and only listen to that one artist? The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

If you listen to the artist less then they will receive less of your money. What's the issue you're seeing there?

Re: Anna's Archive loses $322M Spotify piracy case without a fight

#180

Post by Cpoll »

echelon wrote: post #163
progbits wrote: post #128

They will never see a single cent from that, AA will continue to rotate domains and nothing was accomplished, except for spotify's legal team which earned easy money arguing against empty chair in court. BTW, you can donate and get faster downloads: https://annas-archive.gl/donate Just donated in honor of this. Up yours spotify!

I don't know how to feel about any of this. First and foremost, I feel like Spotify is scummy. I don't like what they did when they were founded, I don't like what they do to artists. I hate the hyperscalers being in this business (Google, Apple, Amazon) as that's another thing they do that devalues an otherwise healthy market. Bringing in outside business division revenues to dump on another market's prices is ecolo…

> piracy brings artists absolutely nothing at all.

This has historically been unclear. Lots of artists make more money from touring and merchandise than from record sales, and piracy is likely to boost those.

Post reply on HN