Man pleads guilty to $8M AI-generated music scheme

Post by vunderba » Sat, Mar 21, 2026, 3:20 PM UTC

QuantumNomad_ wrote: post #3

> using fake email addresses What exactly is a “fake” email address here? If I have three email addresses petethecoolone@gmail.com, joemama69@gmail.com, and michael.j.smith@gmail.com, are those “fake” as well, then? An email address doesn’t have to reflect your real name. How about when I use iCloud Hide My Email to generate a unique email address when I create a new account somewhere? Is that a “fake” email address…

  yourname+amazon@gmail.com
  yourname+etsy@gmail.com
  yourname+itunes@gmail.com

Post by JasonADrury » Sat, Mar 21, 2026, 6:06 PM UTC

lemontheme wrote: post #60

JasonADrury wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think fraud should be legal if it's only targeting large entities like Spotify? Would that make the world a better place?

You're presupposing fraud and illegality. That's what I'm questioning. That said, some good can come of this in the sense that it will (hopefully) discourage these kind of schemes. They don't create value and they harm smaller competitors, who now need to divert resources to increasingly sophisticated bot detection.

Post by fc417fc802 » Sat, Mar 21, 2026, 6:35 PM UTC

lemontheme wrote: post #59

fc417fc802 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's intent, deception, and damages so it's definitely fraud. This isn't a mundane matter of creatively using someone's API in a way they don't like. He came up with a scheme to extract money from them. The ToS is the contract governing payments in this case (IIUC). It's the difference between violating a no skateboarding sign in front of a shopping mall versus a no trespassing sign at a military base. They're bot…

Oh I don't deny what he did is most likely a ToS violation. And under those terms, he should probably be forced to pay back the money. But I don't see how it's fraud in the criminal sense. That's just my judgement as a citizen, not a lawyer. All I see is the shopping mall shaping criminal law to its own benefit. As for the military bases, yeah, stay away from those, kids.

Post by potsandpans » Sun, Mar 22, 2026, 1:13 AM UTC

petesergeant wrote: post #36

randyrand wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In click fraud, it's the platform company defrauding the ads purchasers, by claiming the clicks are legit. All this guy did was break TOS, and find a broken business model. No fraud. Should have found a lawyer.

> Whoever, having devised or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, transmits or causes to be transmitted by means of wire, radio, or television communication in interstate or foreign commerce, any writings, signs, signals, pictures, or sounds for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice…

Post by p0w3n3d » Sun, Mar 22, 2026, 8:59 AM UTC

twothreeone wrote: post #32

p0w3n3d wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you provide an example of the former?

- AT&T “unlimited” mobile plans - Purdue Pharma's OxyContin push - Juul marketing vaping products as a "safer alternative" to smoking - Facebook's sale of user data to Cambridge Analytica - Wells Fargo opening fake accounts for people - ...