Musician charged with wire fraud after using thousands of bots to stream AI music to earn millions in royalties
Sneaky but clever.
A U.S. grand jury has formally charged 52-year-old Michael Smith with conspiracy to commit wire fraud, wire fraud, and money laundering after allegedly buying AI-generated music, posting them on streaming platforms, and then using thousands of bots to stream his posts. This act allowed him to earn millions of dollars in royalties from 2017 through 2024. According to the unsealed indictment from the Justice Department, Mr. Smith claimed in February 2024 that his “existing music has generated at this point over 4 billion streams and $12 million in royalties since 2019.”
This meant he made approximately $2.4 million annually by buying AI-generated tracks, uploading them on various streaming platforms like Spotify, Apple Music, and YouTube Music, and creating bots that allowed his tracks to gain millions of fake streams. With royalty payments often falling at less than one cent per stream, Mr. Smith likely garnered over 240 million streams yearly, most of them through bots.
The music industry, in general, prohibits artificially boosting streams as it will negatively impact artists and musicians, where the money that the streaming company should pay them is funneled into accounts that use bots to increase the listening count of their tracks artificially.
The act is similar to the payola scandal in the 1950s, where DJs and radio stations received money from publishers to give their songs more airtime, artificially inflating their popularity to drive record and album sales. The only difference today is that radio stations have since been replaced by streaming platforms, DJs by user accounts, and artists by AI.
Michael Smith’s acts were severe enough for the FBI to get involved during the investigation. Christie M. Curtis, the Acting Assistant Director in Charge of the New York FBI Field Office, said, “Michael Smith allegedly produced hundreds of thousands of songs with artificial intelligence and utilized automatic features to repeatedly stream the music to generate unlawful royalties to $10 million.
U.S. Attorney Damian Williams also said, “Through his brazen fraud scheme, Smith stole millions in royalties that should have been paid to musicians, songwriters, and other rights holders whose songs were legitimately streamed. Today, thanks to the work of the FBI and the career prosecutors of this Office, it’s time for Smith to face the music.” Smith was arrested last September 4, 2024, and now faces up to a maximum of 20 years imprisonment for each charge if found guilty.
Stay On the Cutting Edge: Get the Tom's Hardware Newsletter
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
Jowi Morales is a tech enthusiast with years of experience working in the industry. He’s been writing with several tech publications since 2021, where he’s been interested in tech hardware and consumer electronics.
-
Notton I wonder how investigators found out they were bots.Reply
There is a similar problem on twitter with bots brazenly boosting boring tweets.
Seems like something feds should look into. -
andrep74 20 years of prison for each charge? The only reason this is prosecuted is that rich and powerful music executives got robbed back. Saying "Smith stole millions in royalties that should have been paid to musicians, songwriters, and other rights holders" is disingenuous, because it's not like he reduced royalties for other works. The music industry consists of the doers and the takers, and technology has made the role of the takers (and probably the doers, soon) obsolete.Reply
The real crime is every time someone pays a dollar per song download and the artists get only pennies. -
husker edzieba said:
Possibly because someone involved with paying the royalties noticed an incredible streaming demand for music nobody ever heard of before.Notton said:I wonder how investigators found out they were bots.
There is a similar problem on twitter with bots brazenly boosting boring tweets.
Seems like something feds should look into. -
husker
I disagree. The artist is free to sell or distribute their music anyway they want: They still own the rights to their music. Using the internet as a method of distribution leverages an incredible array of different technologies that the artist had nothing to do with creating or maintaining. When you download a song for a dollar, you are not just paying for the song, you are paying for the incredible convenience that all of that technology gives to you. This is the problem with basing your income on someone else's technology.andrep74 said:The real crime is every time someone pays a dollar per song download and the artists get only pennies.
If I have a space plane that takes you to a planet made of gold, you can bet that these shuttle rides are going to be expensive. The only thing that made it possible for you to get to the golden planet in the first place was my space plane, so don't complain that the ride is expensive. -
justarandomperson86 Corporations using AI to boost profits: ✅Reply
Individuals using AI to boost profits: ❌ -
setx
Of course companies that sell you the songs don't enjoy any conveniences or external technologies. They work extremely hard pressing that copy key for the song that will give them endless revenues and totally pay your internet providers whose are indispensable for their ability to sell you anything. It's all fair, you know.husker said:When you download a song for a dollar, you are not just paying for the song, you are paying for the incredible convenience that all of that technology gives to you. -
Christopher_115 husker said:Possibly because someone involved with paying the royalties noticed an incredible streaming demand for music nobody ever heard of before.
I wonder if people aren't getting that it was bots that were streaming his stuff, not actual people.
So he was getting paid without any actual humans listening. Totally deserves jail, it's literally stealing from the royalty payers.