Print
The unreleased U2 album "No Line on the Horizon" was leaked onto Bit Torrent last week, and the resulting downloads have sent the RIAA into a frenzied fit. New rumors reported by TechCrunch have revealed that the recording industry might be looking to track down people who downloaded the album using Last.fm’s Scrobbler service. Scrobbler keeps track of songs playing on a user’s computer, regardless of the program used to do so. This information is then shared with Last.fm’s servers which broadcast’s playlists, along with recommending new tracks. According to unconfirmed sources within Last.FM, the RIAA contacted and obtained the logs of users who may have played the leaked U2 tracks. Apparently the logs also contain information that “can be used to identify individuals and will likely be shared with 3rd parties that have relationships with the RIAA.”
Despite the fact that neither Last.fm, or its parent company CBS has yet to confirm these rumors, its privacy policy certainly gives them the legal backing to do so. According to the policy, “…. your record collection (including your skipping history) may be viewed by all other users of Last.fm (who may include other organizations or representatives of other organizations who have registered as Last.fm users) and that they may easily associate this information with your Last.fm username.” Users of the service must be understandably worried. Particularly because they are dealing with an organization which historically solves these types of disputes in a court of law.
Given the fact that that no legal precedent would force Last.fm ito release a user’s personal information, should they be protecting its customers from the RIAA here? Let us know what you think.
Comments are closed on this article
Phated1
February 23, 2009 at 12:24pm
if you read the article on tech crunch (the site linked in this article), multiple members of last.FM have denied the release of this data. They have stated that listening data is avaliable to companies like the RIAA; however, no personally identifiable data is avaliable. As he says:
"The data we make available to labels is aggregate data about their artists - it’s a slightly more detailed version of what you see on the site. We release no data linking users and plays to any third parties.
The only data we provide to labels (in addition to the data publicly available on their artist pages) are historical graphs of listeners and plays. There’s no way to link these to individual users.
If a label was trying to work out who’s been listening to their leaked track, the closest they can get would be to look at the publicly-available listeners on the music pages. I would doubt that would be enough evidence to convict someone, and users can opt out of being displayed there in their settings." Quoted from Russ Garrett a staffer of last.FM
roninnder
February 23, 2009 at 7:57am
This is not the first time, nor will it be the last, that I am greatful that I do not listen to U2.
alanmc76
February 23, 2009 at 7:22am
If you read what is going on here, the people at risk did it to themselves. Last.fm did not provide the music in the first place. It was downloaded illegally via torrent. Scrobbler just makes a history of the music you have on your machine and play.
If these fools decide to download illeagal music and not read the EULA of the services they use, then I have no sympathy for them. They their bed, now they get to sleep in it.
Lesson to learn: Read the EULAs you agree to, and DON'T download illegal music. It's just not worth the risk.
Naw-yi
February 23, 2009 at 10:00am
this is my point, that most of u are missing the point... this scrobbling was written for users to get alike music they liked from a certain source(last.fm), so they too can make a home/internet radio station if they choose to. to share their own flavor of music to other users or to listen to while washing the dishes. now since scrobbler also makes your music on your home computer avaliable to others to listen to this makes all scrobbler enabled users with the same music type vulnerable. this is not whats the most upsetting, the most upsetting is that this scrobbler could have been written for this sort of RIAA search in the 1st place.
now im not saying that i agree with Last.fm, RIAA, or even the pirates, im about the freedom of all internet use to be ungoverned, police free until it is called for. then and only then the Police should inform all involved that their home computers might/will be inspected for illegal activities, and lastly whos to say that is all they are looking at and prosecuting for?
i live a clean life, work have kids, house and last but not lease a wife lol, and unless ive did anything wrong i dont want anyone looking into my belongings.
quickone
February 23, 2009 at 5:50am
Nothing like selling out those who use your service, use us but if you
do something wrong we are going to tattle on you. I have never used
last.fm nor will after this. And that user agreement is just
ridiculous, people are all too willing to give up their information,
although few actually read those things before installing.
RIAA needs to find a new business model instead of trying to litigate things back to how they were pre-MP3
Svetty Parabols
February 23, 2009 at 1:22am
my 2 cents:
1. Let Steam handle the online music distribution system. They have a good handle on how to do it correctly.
2. I havent bought a CD in YEARS, nor do i download mp3s. Is a song or music really that important to possibly be sued over? I'm also boycotting buying music. No need when you can use the good ole radio for free. I'll hit them where it hurts most..the RIAA and Artist's pocketbook. If artists were smart, they would only release music off of their own website and cut out the RIAA completely.
3. Support Independant artists. Most commercial artists suck anyways.
4. The RIAA MIGHT make some money if they..oh..i don't know..maybe...QUIT BUYING LAWYERS AND RACKING UP COURT COSTS. Like your gonna make any money suing some 9 yr old girl for downloading a song anyways.
Naw-yi
February 23, 2009 at 12:08am
1 more thing if you had u2 as a favorate this album would automatically be sent to your player, for alike listened to type of music.
now this will make u a criminal....if u play it or not.
Naw-yi
February 22, 2009 at 11:56pm
im deleting not becuz of legit/nonlegit, im deleting becuz of the hint that a internet site is going to make your internet history attainable. i can see if it was illegal porn, terrorism, but 1 cd. also, this is leaked info, would we have been informed if maxpc hadnt informed us?
this is the only way that the little guy(us) can really get the big companies to listen, "look into internet history without due process and cause, over a certain sign up site, ill delete my user name and stop using this site all together, also ill spread the message to all friends, family, even blog my experience". now this will cuz so much monitary loss companies will get the message.
im paying for my dsl to browse on my free time, unless ive broken the law my internet time should be looked at by only my wife.
n0ctis
February 22, 2009 at 8:18pm
Isn't the information shared be default on a user's page? Can not one simply ferret out the users who have 'scrobbled' the offending music?
phaseone
February 22, 2009 at 7:57pm
Am I the only one who thinks the people who do something illegal are the ones getting worried or upset over this? Unless I am missing something, as long as you have not actually downloaded a copyrighted song that you do not own you have no worries.
MyMojo
February 22, 2009 at 6:20pm
Glad I don't use those jerks! Even if (Big IF) they didn't share the information, just having their EULA say they can and will if necessary is enough to keep me from ever using that crap! If you have this installed, I suggest you uninstall it, or prepare for a knock on the door! Nazi bastards! (If they did it)
If humans evolved from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?
starscream665
February 22, 2009 at 6:12pm
Wow. I had been using Last.fm for awhile, but I removed it from my computer the moment I read this. Hopefully most users will do the same. There are plenty of other internet radio stations anyway.
Jesterace
February 22, 2009 at 5:18pm
Just another reason why I'm glad I didn't jump on the bandwagon and used lastfm.
Naw-yi
February 22, 2009 at 4:42pm
im uninstalling all last.fm that i have, and i like the firefox add-on. anyother add-on like this?
QuikWgn
February 22, 2009 at 4:39pm
last.fm has categorically denied any request for logs was received, and offered even if it did it would not comply.
QUOTED from http://www.last.fm/forum/21713/_/506518/_/8660996
Staff 20 Feb 2009, 23:48 I'd like to issue a full and categorical denial of this. We've never had any request for such data by anyone, and if we did we wouldn't consent to it. Of course we work with the major labels and provide them with broad statistics, as we would with any other label, but we'd never personally identify our users to a third party - that goes against everything we stand for.
As far as I'm concerned Techcrunch have made this whole story up./end QUOTE<br>
Now the question becomes do you believe TechCrunch whi IMHO has become less and less relaible recently, or last.fm who is owned by CBS, who is a member of the RIAA?
