Update: Last.fm vehemently denies this rumor. See below.
That leaked U2 album is causing all sorts of trouble. The unreleased album, which is due out on March 3, found its way onto BitTorrent and was downloaded hundreds of thousands of times. That, apparently, sent music industry lawyers over at the Recording Industry Association of America into a fit. As a result, word is going around that the RIAA asked social music service Last.fm for data about its user’s listening habits to find people with unreleased tracks on their computers. And Last.fm, which is owned by CBS, actually handed the data over to the RIAA, according to a tip we received:
I heard from an irate friend who works at CBS that last.fm recently provided the RIAA with a giant dump of user data to track down people who are scrobbling unreleased tracks. As word spread numerous employees at last.fm were up in arms because the data collected (a) can be used to identify individuals and (b) will likely be shared with 3rd parties that have relationships with the RIAA.
Supposedly, the operations team which handed over the data in the first place weren’t told the true purpose for the transfer or who was getting the data until after the fact, and only when they had to help with some corrupted data. It sounds like it was more of a corporate decision. I’ve contacted both CBS and the RIAA. Most of the Last.fm team is in London, where the weekend has already started. For now Last.fm says: “To our knowledge, no data has been made available to RIAA.” (The RIAA declined to comment).
Setting aside what actually happened to the data, and assuming this rumor is true, why would the RIAA target Last.fm? It wasn’t streaming the U2 album, and it is not an illegal download service. But Last.fm has millions of users who are heavy music consumers, and many of them download Last.fm’s Scrobbler software which keeps track of every single song you listen to on your computer, no matter which music player you use. In other words, it captures tracks played from illegal BitTorrent downloads just as easily as from iTunes.
Last.fm members knowingly share what they are listening to with the rest of the Last.fm community, and in return receive social recommendations of music they might like. That is the whole point of the service. And Last.fm’s privacy policy does clearly state:
. . . your record collection (including your skipping history) may be viewed by all other users of Last.fm (who may include other organisations or representatives of other organisations who have registered as Last.fm users) and that they may easily associate this information with your Last.fm username.
But most probably never even considered it a possibility that individually identifiable information about their listening habits (legal, illegal, or otherwise) could be handed over to an organization known for taking consumers to court for file-sharing. What makes this even more egregious is that it appears to be absent any legal precedent (such as a pending lawsuit) for which Last.fm could at least hide behind as an excuse.
Incidents like this highlight how the social Web can sometimes bite back if you are not careful. It also raises the issue of who owns all of this data about you and what they can do with it. (The same issue that caused Facebook to backtrack on recent changes to its data policy). Unfortunately, it’s come down to this: you really shouldn’t share any data on the Web you wouldn’t feel comfortable seeing in a court of law.
(Please contact us at tips [at] techcrunch if you have more information about this).
Update: Some more denials from Last.FMers, including one of the co-founders, Richard Jones, in comments, who says this story is “utter nonsense and totally untrue,” and another one from Russ Garrett, a systems architect.
Update 2 (2/21/09): There are a lot of angry questions being raised about this post in comments and elsewhere. Lots of demands for retractions and some people questioning the timing of the post late on Friday night.
First, on the timing. The reason this story was posted so late was because I had contacted a Last.fm spokesperson in the U.S. earlier in the day who promised me a response, and I decided to wait for it. Several hours passed, with assurances that a statement was being prepared. So I was a little surprised when it was only one sentence:
To our knowledge, no data has been made available to RIAA.
That statement is hardly a categorical denial. It leaves open all sorts of holes. Was the data collected internally, but never actually handed over? Was it made available to a specific record label or group of record labels, perhaps at the request of the RIAA. Or did the whole thing never happen? I asked for clarification, but again was referred to the single vague statement. After I posted, I again contacted the spokesperson to see if she had any further comment she would like to make. She didn’t.
Soon after I posted, however, plenty of unofficial but heartfelt denial came from Last.fm staffers in London, two of which I linked to last night in the update above. The one from Russ Garrett, in particular, raised even more questions. His denial starts out unequivocal, but then he adds a squishy disclaimer:
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.
Hmm, so could the RIAA or a record label use the data to identify people? I never suggested that it was Last.fm that was singling out individuals listening to unreleased tracks. The issue is whether the RIAA or any of its member companies are trying to do so and whether or not Last.fm is helping them.
As Garrett points out, Last.fm shares aggregate listening data with the labels. Are there any unique identifiers associated with this data that could lead back to an individual, despite any precautions Last.fm might take? (It wouldn’t be unprecedented—remember that leaked AOL search data a few years ago?) I sent Garrett an email about 5 hours ago asking him some of these questions.
From the very beginning, I’ve presented this story for what it is: a rumor. Despite my attempts to corroborate it and the subsequent detail I’ve been able to gather, I still don’t have enough information to determine whether it is absolutely true. But I still don’t have enough information to determine that it is absolutely false either. What I do have are a lot of unanswered questions about how exactly Last.fm shares user data with the record industry.
Update 3 (2/22/09): Garrett got back to me. He responds:
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.
Update 4 (2/23/09): Last.fm co-founder Richard Jones expands on his denial in comments with an official post on the Last.fm blog. He also adds this:
We never share personally identifiable data such as email and IP addresses. The only type of data we make available to labels and artists, other than what you see on the site, is aggregate data of listeners and number of plays.
Erick Schonfeld will be seen serving frapuccinos in a Starbucks soon. What a piece of investigate intelligent scribble. show me your press credentials please Mr.Schonfeld!
Stuff like this ruins the reputation of the publishing website.
He’ll probably get a promotion along with that Wauters chap who posts homophobic slurs then pretends it was an accident.
Wow, I wish someone would come along and just put the RIAA (and its bottom feeding, blood sucking attorneys) outta their misery!
RT
http://www.anonymity.eu.tc
last.fm has denied this bs!
cite – http://www.tech...comment-2632012
cite – http://www.last...6518/1#f8660996
TechCrunch, exercise some respectable journalism here. You heard from a friend!?! What other evidence do you have to release a damaging article like this? Have you seen the data is there written correspondence?
And where in CBS is this source located? CBS is a giant company and my guess is that very few people working for CBS, outside of those working directly for last.fm, know squat about what’s going on with last.fm
Most likely TC’s silence after Last.fm’s statement is because it’s now 5pm and the “weekend has started” for the folks at TC, which was Schoenfeld’s excuse for allowing unsubstantiated rumors about Last.fm to be posted and to stand all weekend without comment to begin with: “Most of the Last.fm team is in London, where the weekend has already started.”
Interesting game. Throw out a rumor when it’s too late to be commented on, and then when a response is issued it’s “too late” because its’ now the weekend. Rumor stays for at least 48 hours.
This is pretty shameful. It’s one thing to make a mistake, quite another to fail to respond when an employee of last.fm has categorically denied it: http://tinyurl.com/aaxrdg
Not cool. Sort it out TC. At the very least you owe the last.fm guys a prompt response, this could cause them massive damage. If you stand by you story, defend it. If you don’t, apologize and retract.
I hadn’t even thought of that. It makes this whole story so much worse.
Retraction? Update in a new post? Come on, TC, try to fix some of the baseless damage you’ve done to Last.fm.
What annoys me is that people are deleting accounts and losing their entire scrobbling history based on shoddy journalism.
This hurts those people who have spent years carefully collecting their data far more than last.fm as a whole.
Jonty
(Another last.fm staff member)
As a followup, we have now stopped the job that removes users marked for deletion, so if you did delete your account in haste and want your scrobbles back, please contact our support team.
I say screw ‘em. Self-righteous morons.
They were scared by this slanderous post. Not everyone knows that TC has shoddy reputation as far as reporting baseless rumors goes.
Last.fm is being really good about this whole thing, and stopping people’s data from being deleted over TC’s irresponsibility is really cool.
I wish we could get to the bottom of this. If the post is not true, then Techcrunch will need to watch out.
Last.fm is a UK company, and UK defamation and libel laws are VERY strong. I believe according to UK law if you publish something which is not true and it damages the reputation and business of that person, you can be found liable for libel or defamation with significant damages and lawyers fees. I am not a lawyer so I don’t know the merits of this case, but I do work in publishing, and I know that publishing anything that may not be true and which can be accessed by a UK audience can be very dangerous.
Anjali Sen
So if you are not a lawyer then your advice is worthless. Your “advice” that anything published and accessed by a UK audience is dangerous is based on your hysterical and racist view of the “british” empire.
Haha, “According to a tip we received…I heard from an irate friend who works at CBS”
So, an anonymous source + “friend of a friend” = BULLSHIT!
I feel so bad for last.fm right now.
But at the same time, that information’s publicly available. If you dont want the RIAA to know you’re listening to an unreleased track, dont scrobble it.
The Last.FM denial (though very strongly worded) misses out on one issue. The data is available through their API. What you’ve scrobbled, and who you are.
So that may be what is going on here. RIAA hires a developer to get user data from last.fm API. An api key is all that is needed. No special ‘requests’ or ‘dumps’ from last.fm.
However, this does not mean it happened, and it would be nice to see Erick dig deeper into this story and let us know what is really going on.
‘The RIAA’ and every other boogieman and boogiewoman can access data through the Last.FM API, yes. However, that does not contain any more ‘identifying information’ about you than viewing the pages of the Last.FM website itself. Your IP, your email address, everything required to _identify_ you are not available.
Furthermore, scrobbling doesn’t record what kind of media you listen to. If you play one of U2’s songs, it doesn’t note whether it’s from an MP3 or a legitimate promotional CD.
Be that as it may, that is not what Erick reported or said. This article makes it sound like Last.fm pulled up lots of personal data on their users, linked it with the publicly available data, packaged it up for the RIAA and handed it over.
This is a lie.
Oh please. Stuff like this gets published all the time in news papers and the media. Erick made VERY clear that it was secondhand information. The article clearly states “if this was true..” and highlights the dangers of Last.fm’s public records and TOS.
Irresponsible journalists wouldn’t.
“Irresponsible journalists wouldn’t”? Are you serious?
It takes an irresponsible journalist to post this kind of thing to begin with! A story posted without factchecking that hurts a company’s reputation? How, in any light, is that responsible?
In hindsight, I realise that the comment that I left sounded harsh, but I promise that I’m not attacking you directly, I’m just flabbergasted at the entire ordeal.
No not under UK libel and defamation law.
They are VERY strict. Even passing rumours which are untrue is subject to libel and defamation. http://www.nybo.../articles/22245
I know, I work in publishing and some of our books are published in the UK. Our UK partner has been sued several times.
Last.fm is a UK company.
Anjali Sen
Tabitha, I’m sorry but you’re totally incorrect. This is third-degree hearsay, and there’s not an editor on the planet that would allow an article in a legitimate newspaper to be published if the journalist was up-front about the lack of sourcing. (There are, of course, journalists who lie about their sourcing and get away with it — for a while — e.g. Stephen Glass.)
There is absolutely no way this should have been published, and I will never visit TechCrunch again. I have zero indication that this is not the normal level of “journalism” that goes on on a daily basis. Not even a retraction. This is horrifying.
the comments in the post are funny
This seems like the latest in a string of tabloid-like articles that sound more like a personal vendetta against Last.fm than anything else.
As others have said, completely irresponsible ‘journalism’.
If I was a last.fm founder i’d post more than a comment on here and go and watch a film. A story like this could go so huge they might no have any users by Monday, a weekend is a long time. Even if it is/isnt true I bet a lot of people are reconsidering their online habits etc.
In fact, just because the posters above say they are from Last.fm who is to say they aren’t imposters from the RIAA. Last time I checked I wasnt ACTUALLY baronvonsextron even though I said I was in the box above
RIAA impostors? Seriously?
You must have missed the link posted twice in these comments already.
http://www.last.../21713/_/506518
The same last.fm fellows, on last.fm, posting with their staff accounts, saying the same thing.
I’m sure glad TechCrunch sets the record straight where scurrilous gossip blogs like Valleywag would have just run with the story without contacting the company involved!
Oh, wait, what?
Sooo…wouldn’t it be nice if there was a nifty way to highlight privacy policies that we all just click through to see if there is anything in there we should really worry about…I’m sure most of the policies I’ve accepted have something in the fine print that I would not agree with…whats a man to do!
Dear RIAA,
I use last.fm and live in Australia. Knock yerself out darling.
Love,
Dave
They have a “Branch Office” in OZ, natch. And far more teeth legally that the Yank version courtesy of the basically corrupt aus.forelock-tugging.ausjudicial system.
So, good luck to ya, Dave.
Oh shit shit shit. I’m so fucked.
I’ve been using http://www.maestro.fm for a while now to discover new music and listen to my entire music library. I stopped using last.fm since I found maestro.
Hey everyone. I heard from a source inside techcrunch that Erick Schonfeld enjoys fornication with goats. A second source suspiciously hung up on me when I asked for confirmation.
I have also heard this, and I think more people need to know.
Thanks, Marsha and Shmelvis! It’s the first I’ve heard this! I hope a blog picks this up. People really need to know. I assume it’s true, because I heard it from two anonymous commenters on TechCrunch. That’s enough to base a story on, right?
Update from TC at the bottom of the article saying:
“Update: Some more denials from Last.FMers, including one of the co-founders, Richard Jones, in comments who says this story s (sic) “utter nonsense and totally untrue,” and another one from Russ Garrett, a systems architect.”
Wow. Love the phrasing. /sarcasm. Could you try to make it sound more like a continued attack against last.fm? They’re defending themselves against TC’s irresponsible, completely unprofessional journalist and TC’s staff makes it sound like some conspiracy.
*faceplant*
And I think the quote from Last.fm is: “Techcrunch are full of sh*t.” Why aren’t they printing that one? Sorry for the language, but that’s a quote, so…
http://blog.las...re-full-of-shit
Dear Erick,
If I ever see you, I will punch you.
Bests
-Tim
Friday night. I was halfway through my third pint when Techcrunch decided to attempt to discredit my company. It didn’t really stop me though. Who the hell believes the crap Techcrunch come out with nowadays? You guys… keep at it though, I’m sure a few people are interested in your insubstantiated bullshit.
Go eat horse shit. All you’re doing is losing readers of your pathetic web site. The author of this “news story” should be fucked up the arse (but only if it’s not his preference) then fired.
So journalistic integrity means what now?
http://www.time...1879075,00.html
That’s some real journalism
This doesn’t surprise me at all. I interviewed at lala recently and they mentioned that they had no choice but to work with the RIAA to keep streaming costs down. People, you’re sharing information publicly and you’re not paying for anything! What do you expect? If you’re paranoid just don’t scrobble.
This story is amazing, pull some BS out of the air and we have a story. Breaking News!: Erick Schonfeld is gay, news at a 11.
Don’t lump him in with gay people! Most of the ones I know have integrity.
So,
An indignant denial on *a message board* is MORE factual than a rumor on a tech news blog?
If you think this is all she wrote on this little bon mott, you are sadly mistaken.
The RIAA is getting creamed over the bittorrent issue and now they are getting scared.
Scared animals that will fight with all they have.
Wake up.
A post on a message board located on the site itself, by a staff member and one of the founders? Yes, I’d say that was significantly more credible than Techcrunch.
I’d prefer to see something on their blog or somewhere official other than a support forum refuting it. Even some of the posters above haven’t put anything on their company blog pages. Something on their site refuting everything would be better than saying the deleted scrobles are not being deleted in case users want to change their minds and return. (Perhaps facebook should have said this week?)
The staff did respond on Last.FM itself: http://www.last...6518/1#f8660996
As for their blog: It’s low-frequency and publishes actual news about their service. Turning it over for rebuttals to bullshit TechCrunch stories would be out of proportion to say the least.
That guy is a Systems Architect though and has not confirmed that scrobbling can provide such info.
Would not a rebuttal about their service not passing info to the RIAA on users habits warrant a blog post! All that could happen next is some mainstream news will go off with the headlline and you’ll be reading this in tomorrows daily mail.
If posting it on their own official forum with their own staff accounts isn’t enough for you (one of the founders responded for crying-out loud, how much higher can you get?) then I fail to see how posting it on the blog will lessen your own paranoia. The RIAA has access to no more information than a standard user, in other words diddly squat to get so worked up about. All we see here is the usual hash that Techcrunch constantly spews out.
Here is what they said on their blog. Cut Last.fm some slack. This was posted over the weekend, so it took them some time to counter TC’s lies.
http://blog.las...re-full-of-shit
Here at TechCrunch, we don’t believe in getting the facts. We just want to pay the bills any way we can. Pathetic.
I’m glad this has been refuted, but it has made me stop and think about using last.fm.
I don’t mind overall data being shared, but if last.fm is really all about mining user data – with personal identification – to ’sell’ to lobby groups or media corps. count me out.
I’m fine with “band XXXX is more popular during a release advertising campaign” or “males 20 – 25 listen to XXX most” but when it’s “username I.P address 69.123.x.x. blahblah” then i’m not digging it.
And for those of you who said, “So what if TC lied. Last.fm will recover when the truth comes out.”
The bell can’t be unrung, and TC owes Last.fm a huge post/retraction/update/corroboration.
This story is a lie, but if TC has more info, they need to post it. If they don’t, they need to come clean. Their silence is letting this rumor spread all over the internet. I’m sure it will get syndicated out, and Last.fm will continue to suffer from this shoddy journalism.
More shi–er, I mean, shoddy reporting from Erik Schonfeld.
Mike, please come back from vacation so you can finally fire this clown.
No retraction? No apology?
This kind of article could completely destroy a company. It’s trash journalism and deserves an unreserved public apology.
I m a Last Fm subscriber. If this is he true….surely I should delete me account.
see http://www.last...+on+the+Horizon
All those are thieves surely?
Pathetic.
For those who believe this article, please visit this post.
http://www.last...6518/1#f8660996
@Stn, read that forum post carefully.
it says “As far as I’m concerned Techcrunch have made this whole story up.”
Not, “Techcrunch have made this story up” only a subtle difference, but no difference from the techcrunch original “According to a tip we received”
Still no firm statements from either side yet.
when i say firm i mean something legally actionable
Russ (Our systems architect) also commented on this blog post:
http://www.tech...comment-2631993
And RJ (One of the three co-founders of last.fm) did too:
http://www.tech...comment-2632012
@Jonty, I’m not sure if last.fm is preparing a legal response, but I’m sure I’m not alone (especially when you see how this is bein picked up on blogs and twitter) in that I’d like to have seen something more of an official response and rebuttal than a couple of posts on the TC blog.
Your PR department really should have been running with this from friday afternoon but they’ve decided (?) to let it fester all weekend?
TC’s poor commenting system won’t let me reply yo your other post (Asking why we didn’t have PR moving on Friday afternoon):
For us, in London, this broke around midnight on Friday night.
Considering it’s been the weekend for us for the length of this debacle it’s not surprising that most official responses have been “this is utter toss” from staff on _our_ forums, on Twitter, in comments here, or directly contacting TechCrunch.
@David Singleton maybe you shouldnt spend friday night in the pub then , hehe
but does last.fm shut down for the weekend. It not worth a response, seems strange and still no real denial yet either
OK, then read this. It is very, very firm. If TC hadn’t posted this on a Friday (very late in the UK), then Last.fm might have been able to respond more quickly.
http://blog.las...re-full-of-shit
Just seen my twitter, its all over it and the headline is being picked up. Those guys really need to get out there and fight the fires.
http://microblo...etails/17699430 see how much it has already spread, by the morning they will probably look like the spawn of satan
U2 sucks
Obvious troll is obvious.
Well, that just does it, no more using them. I like using http://www.maestro.fm better anyway. I can listen to my own music and even sync my itunes playlists so I can get remote access. Bye bye lastfm.
I can’t help but wonder, did you even bother to read any of the comments on this article before posting that?
Here’s an easy fix, or just a simple way to mess with the evidence… take some short 5 second audio clip, change the ID3 tags to match this album in question and put the song on repeat… If everyone does this, they’ll have to sue everyone.
After completing the above, uninstall scrobbler and never use Last.FM again should the story be true…
The story’s not true. All these “ifs” are misleading. RIAA and Last.fm have firmly denied this all over the internet. The meme is getting picked up anyway.
TC, retraction? Update? Corroboration? Anything?
Fuck Techchrunch for harming a perfectly good website like Last.fm. I hope they can sue your arses into the ground for this.
Techcrunch is crossing the line when posting a foolish story like this without further verifying the allegations.
This site, can make and break startups, and we do appreciate the making, but now fuck you Mike Arrington!
They shouldn’t have the power to make or break anything until they clean up their journalistic standards. That’s the real shame here.
It’s as if I became the leading word on ornithology. I can’t tell a woodpecker from a hummingbird, but I know more about that than TC does about startups and online music, apparently.
Wow, quality reporting over here on this website. “These are total rumors that probably have no basis in fact but let’s write an entire article about it as if it were true just in case!”
I’d like to see a take down of this article or at least a retraction. Techcrunch doing journalism on rumors is just bad. Sadly, this will probably be the last i read of it.
Pathetic. Fuck off rumor-spreading scum.
I for one will not be uninstalling the Last.fm client from my computer. I actually use their service to find and purchase (yes you read that right!) new music. I already avoid the major labels as much as possible, choosing instead independent labels and artists.
I’ve not nothing to fear from the RIAA, BPI, IFPI or their associates elsewhere. Oh, and to those saying Last.fm are evil now because they’re owned by CBS, a) this is old news, wake up! b) if anything, the service is even better now, particularly with the partnership with 7digital. Anyway, that’s my two-penny-worth on the subject.
TechCrunch and it’s arse covering “?”’s reminds me of Fox News.
If it’s really a question then get the friggin answer before publishing.
No wonder your head honcho is taking a break.
Schonfeld should take a longer one.
Why is this still up? Why is there not a retraction? It’s not true, the Last.fm guys have you told you this now. It’s not a “denial”, you made this up and have been told it’s not true, so take it down.
Mr Arrington, this is why you get spat at, yeah? Is it starting to make sense now?
I hope this isn’t true. There is nothing else to say until someone confirms or denys it.
It’s been confirmed many times that this article is complete nonsense.
Thankgod for the Hype Machine then, eh
“IF” this turned out to be true, which I doubt, why not boycott U2 because nothing gets the go ahead with U2 material without The Egomaniac, Bono giving the OK. Time to pay some tax in your own country Bono……. Free at last Free at last, the U2 album is Free at Last.
slander?
Technically, libel – slander is spoken words, libel written ones.
What surprises me most about this article is that people still listen to U2.
LOL