A couple of months ago, the music streaming world went wild. A platform called Anna’s Service claimed it had stolen Spotify’s catalog and put it online. Everything, you might say? Everything, indeed. What happened, and how did Spotify react? And what were the consequences? This is the story of Spotify and the 13 trillion dollar lawsuit!
Let’s read all about it!
Spotify and the 13 trillion-dollar lawsuit: How did it start?
It all started last December. In the labyrinth of the internet, where, as you know, just about everything humanity has to offer can be found. Sometimes for the worse. In this universe so vast that it’s impossible to measure and, above all, control, a search engine called Anna’s Archive published a blog post that turned the streaming world upside down. It announced that it had created the largest music database in human history. All of it is accessible for free, via peer-to-peer software. Illegal downloading, in short. And therefore available to the entire world, without subscribing to a music streaming service.
Anna’s Archive announced that 86 million songs and 256 million metadata records had been retrieved. According to Anna’s Archive, this accounts for 99.6% of Spotify streams. It’s also worth noting that these 86 million tracks don’t represent Spotify’s entire catalog; they make up less than 40%. The figures are still substantial, however, representing 300 terabytes of data. You read that right, 300 terabytes. Monumental. This initiative, dubbed the “first preservation archive for music,” is considered by the search engine to be a form of activism.
On a mission?
While Anna’s Archive previously focused on pirating books and magazines, they’ve changed course. Or rather, broadened their horizons. Their mission? Get this: nothing less than the preservation of humanity’s culture and knowledge. They add, “With your help, humanity’s musical heritage will be forever protected from destruction by natural disasters, wars, budget cuts, and other catastrophes.” Quite ambitious, to say the least.
To achieve their goal, these pirates tried every possible means to retrieve Spotify’s content. And they found a way to do it. According to Anna’s Archive, this is 100% justified. They elaborate on their argument, supported by graphs and calculations, explaining why they act this way.
They believe the music industry unduly favors the most popular artists, thus rendering others invisible. And they attempt to prove it by presenting numerous statistics and analyses. Their reasoning is structured and compelling, and the data appear reliable. And it’s also possible that we, as music experts and consumers, agree with some of the data presented by Anna’s Archive.
There’s something almost fascinating about their way of justifying illegal action with concrete data, as if Anna’s Archive, by rallying music lovers to their cause, were absolving itself of the responsibility of simply stealing the art produced by artists. Or as if their actions became necessary because they were somehow justified.
While the goal of preserving human culture is laudable, the methods are questionable and must be challenged. And Spotify has been able to count on major supporters to amplify its voice.
Spotify and the 13 trillion dollar lawsuit – How did Spotify retaliate?
It was only a matter of days before Spotify retaliated. The Swedish giant couldn’t possibly let an opportunity to defend itself and position itself as the savior of the music industry slip by. Nor could copyrighted files be made freely and without restrictions.
This has already happened, before streaming services even emerged. And it cost both labels and artists colossal sums, while also redefining the rules of the music industry. Because Spotify isn’t the only one affected by the Anna’s Archive case. Labels are potentially directly impacted. Among them are Universal Music Group, Sony Music Entertainment, and Warner Music Group.
Numbers!
To make a big splash, what better way than to file a lawsuit for an amount equivalent to several GDPs? 13 trillion. We, too, struggle to grasp what that figure represents. In total, that’s approximately $150,000 for each downloaded file.
In a statement to Billboard, Spotify asserts:
“Spotify has identified and disabled the nefarious user accounts that engaged in unlawful scraping. We’ve implemented new safeguards for these types of anti-copyright attacks and are actively monitoring for suspicious behavior. Since day one, we have stood with the artist community against piracy, and we are actively working with our industry partners to protect creators and defend their rights.”
Anna’s Archive’s line of defense? Exoneration. They claim they aren’t pirates because the songs don’t belong to them and can be accessed via peer-to-peer software. A rather flimsy argument, considering that in their blog post, they explicitly stated they had found a way to scrape Spotify’s entire catalog.
Spotify and the 13 trillion dollar lawsuit – What are the consequences?
It’s almost sure that Anna’s Archive won’t pay the $13 trillion, or that Spotify and the three major global record labels hope this money will end up in their pockets. This lawsuit serves primarily as a warning: if you mess with us, we have the strength and firepower to bring you down. We are too powerful for you, they seem to be saying. And above all, we will not back down. And we will not let anything slide.
From a legal standpoint, things are progressing. A US federal judge has ordered infrastructure providers to block access to parts of the Anna’s Archive website. A way to limit their impact, without, however, completely restricting access for the time being. This action follows the suspension of Anna’s Archive’s domain name a few weeks earlier. But in some countries and with various URLs, Anna’s Archive remains accessible. It’s quite worrying, especially since the metadata for the stolen files has reportedly begun to be distributed, even though the songs themselves don’t seem to be available for download yet.
Where are we heading?
This case is interesting because it reveals, or rather reminds us, how much the music industry is subject to regular acts of piracy. It’s the first time an action of this magnitude has occurred, but it’s not the first time copyrighted music has become available online without users having to pay a cent to listen. A few months ago, we told you the story of Musi, a streaming platform that fell victim to Spotify and others. And Musi wasn’t an isolated incident.
With the development of AI and the daily exchange of virtually unlimited files, a growing number of initiatives and services are attempting to make recorded music available for free. Until now, these initiatives have been subject to controls, sometimes only after a few months, giving them time to grow and cause harm. But given their proliferation, and with streaming platforms constantly raising subscription prices, what might the future hold? Will we have to contend with a resurgence of services like Napster, smaller and less well-known but numerous nonetheless? Will we soon witness a reshuffling of the deck in a context where digital technology has revolutionized everything?
What limits exist to the proliferation of these tools, and how reliable are they if users decide to use illegal platforms? It is still too early to grasp the consequences of the lawsuit filed against Anna’s Archive. Especially since, although access to the site appears limited, the files remain available somewhere. What would happen if they were to be released? Are we witnessing one of the biggest piracy operations in history?
Behind the scenes, judges are working hard, but the procedures are slow. Could the world of music streaming be about to experience a major upheaval?
