Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
They are on bid, so he can sell to them. But they won't hold it for long.
MM's don't inventory OTC crap like this. No need to.
I think he is just selling to MM's, who will get too many shares and start cleaning up their balance here at some point if they haven't already.
I don't understand, who keeps selling all these shares!!!!
🤣
Do you know Tom611? You might want to touch base with him before doing this to yourself. He disappeared a few months ago and may have valuable insight for you.
however
if I loose i'm use to being pushed off the balcony that's been the story on the OTC ever since Capone moved to Chicago.
My gamble is a guy like Soros falls out of his wheel chair and looses his wallet
and gets caught is a naked short squeeze.
I just bought 5 times as many shares
has to be something here
Misleading at best... Closer to fraud. He doesn't bother to say how much it is % wise or payment wise, nor that it will take 30 years or so to break even with that "valuable" interest in Listerine.
..
.
I wonder if Jake's recent press release in Guitar Girl Magazine about his beloved Listerine stakes will be of any benefit to his remaining shareholders.
Jake recently claimed on the BCAP board that he'd won his case against Spotify, but had signed a non-disclosure agreement so can't give any details. That's very convenient.
However, Jake's label was being distributed to Spotify by The Orchard. Any money from Spotify would have gone to The Orchard, who take a cut before paying Jake. So, if Jake was owed millions, The Orchard would be owed a lot of money too, but I don't remember anywhere in the case them asking where their share was.
Also, there were a lot of artists on Jake's label apart from himself, like these guys on the Intstagram page that only got 19 followers. They were wondering where their money was, like this guy's request on the Soundcloud help pages back in 2019:
So, if Jake really did finally get money from Spotify, did he make all the artists sign non-disclosure agreements before giving them their share?
When you are dumping shares into the market to pay for it, it is a net negative for current investors. I know you know this, just wanted to comment this for the peanut gallery. MAYBE this is cool for a retirement investment when you are 30. Not for a pubco.
My apologies for omitting that there is indeed a small benefit to song from an incremental revenue stream however small that benefit may be
However as I’m sure your 100.% aware from your own analysis an asset purchase might boost SONG revenue albeit it by a very modest amount each quarter but a modest revenue boost is not the same as boosting shareholder value for ordinary shareholders
Anyone can buy revenue streams but when you have potentially paid top dollar or potentially over paid for the assets concerned and the expected returns don’t even seem to cover the cost of capital let alone the costs of managing the incremental revenue stream there is likely to be negative shareholder value created for ordinary shareholders from the purchase unless SONG can demonstrate how they add real value to the purchased assets from their actions as financial PR alone will not boost the underlying revenue flows from music users
This endless potentially misleading PR from SONG around these tiny royalty streams and the well known artists linked (directly or indirectly ) to the purchased assets without full disclosure that they are not linked to the PRO Music Rights catalog and without disclosure of any numbers doesn’t seem to be working for the SONG share price
In all my years in the industry I have never ever come across a rights owning business that issues a PR statement each time it receives a small business as usual royalty or buys a small asset at retail prices but I do appreciate that for Jake receiving a royalty every quarter without reverting to threats of court legal action may be a bit of a new concept to him
If I had issued a PR statement each time I got a royalty receipt when running my music business I would never have had any time to actually add value in my key role as a music publisher and record label for all of my stakeholders not least the composers and artists we represented as well as my shareholders and employees and customers alike
The concept of drawing an inflated basic salary before I had created real tangible value for ALL of my other stakeholders first ( as listed above) remains an alien concept to me personally but maybe that’s why I could secure funding from other sources and didn’t need to resort to being an OTC CEO
I don't know how the AI was trained, but if it was Jakey's web history then yikes:
https://promusicrights.com/search?q=dick&type=work
Also seems to be a big fan of "anal"
https://promusicrights.com/search?q=anal&type=work
Did Jakey train the AI on his browser history?
Jakey's AI is very very racist:
https://promusicrights.com/search?q=nigger&type=work
That is a hard 'r' folks. Click on the work, you can see they are all assigned to Jakey's company as AI.
TD
I bought a few more shares because from $7 a share to 24 cents seems to be a deal
I did the math on a few of them as well that Jake PR'd and it would take 25-30 years just to break even. Nothing but PR bait to sell overpriced stock.
What I mean by benefit to SONG is that the payments would go to SONG's financials as "revenue".
..
.
You can do your own maths from this earlier helpful post from p-rawl
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=175083693
Buying small royalty streams at top dollar from retail auction sites such as royalty exchange then adding overheads of a CEO drawing a salary of $12 million per annum plus other overheads is on my view not adding shareholder value for retail investors holding ordinary shares who could buy similar assets direct from such retail sites without the corporate overheads of SONG
Jake has yet to explain how he plans to boost the revenue streams of these passive investments over historic levels as the assets seem to be held as passive investments not assets which are being worked
To even cover the basic salary of the CEO alone would require an investment of circa $120 million in such assets before a cent is available for ordinary SONG shareholders assuming the cash flow from the PRO catalog outperforms its historic performance
Personally if I had $120m to invest I wouldn’t be buying passive royalty streams from a retail auction site instead I would be seeking assets that I can grow
Again maybe Jake can enlighten us with the actual revenue flows by catalog and what marketing SONG is doing as a rights owner to market individual assets to improve historic revenue flows if my assumption that these are being held as passive investments is incorrect
When you don’t own 100% of the rights it is not easy to cost justify marketing spend as only a percentage of the income comes back to you as a partial rights owner and many of the royalty stream acquired fall into this category
P-Rawl you can probably take the credit for many of these 50 views personally given the due diligence that you have shared on the SONG music catalog with investors and potential investors
Still not seen any tracks I would want to add to my personal Spotify playlist yet from the SONG music catalog
Maybe someone out there (like Jake’s mum) appreciates AI loops and Jake’s unique musical talent more than me
Keep up the good work on your research into the SONG music catalog
Is anything not Artificial in Jake’s world ?
Despite having 30 years as a Music Executive I have yet to meet a single composer or artist who has signed up to PRO Music Rights which is odd for a PRO that claims to have a 7.4% market share and the fact that I used to manage over 1,000 artists and composers who collectively have affirmations with most of the recognised PRO’s
If anyone can introduce me to a real life PRO Music Rights composer / artist I would love to understand how the composers / artists get paid as I haven’t seen any composer / artist payments in the SONG financial statements and still don’t understand how the SONG business model adds value to real life composers , artists or music users despite a lifetime in the music industry
Not the small royalty stakes that SONG bought as a retail investor in a modest number of songs from royalty exchange that have a very low commercial value as the future residual revenue streams are very small despite being linked ( often indirectly) to some well known artists as these are not part of SONG’s PRO offering as the royalty exchange stakes don’t seem to include ALL rights despite SONG’s constant stream of PR about these well known artists
Jake if you are reading maybe you can schedule a Q&A session with say just 10 or 12 of your composers / artists and a few of your customers with posters on this forum so we can put our open questions direct to them ( if the composers, artists and satisfied customers actually exist )
With 1,000 composers / artists in my network the internet is full of digital footprints linking the creatives to the music company I founded and to members of our management team and myself personally
Which begs the question, where are the tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of links and digital footprints on the internet linking genuine artists / composers back to SONG and Jake one would expect for a PRO representing real artists and composers given the claims that SONG makes about having such a big market share ?
Or maybe SONG just doesn’t have even 10 or 12 real artists / composers or a handful of customers willing to speak up for SONG ?
Jake if you are reading please enlighten us as you recently asked for public posts as you could not access private messages
Less than 50 views in 8 years on YouTube but he somehow got millions of plays on Spotify and still earns a few thousand dollars a month in royalties ???????
There are 333 fake artists in the Pro Music Rights catalog with names that start with "Accent":
Accent1ner, Accent3boys, Accent6top, Accent8er2000, Accent10o01, Accent, _cuddly10, Accent, _rock, Accent, _val, Accentbal903, Accentbear2001, Accentbeastxx, Accentbeh1, Accentben2000, Accentberty13, Accentbestx, Accentblu1234, Accentboi98xx, Accentboy008, Accentbrandt, Accentbrasky33, Accentbu, _xx, Accentbub888, Accentcan11223344, Accentcarpy95, Accentceop, Accentcety, Accentcoakl, Accentcon27252, Accentcrank, Accentctg300, Accentda771, Accentda1699, Accentdacdc, Accentdamf91, Accentdben, Accentdcats, Accentde112, Accentdeem, Accentdem12345, Accentdepth, Accentder529, Accentdicx, Accentdo8555, Accentdog5, Accentdops101, Accentdor99, Accentdour2, Accentdre0830, Accentdum123, Accentdvox, Accentfail123, Accentfan08, Accentfang56, Accentfeen, Accentfin10, Accentfoolz, Accentforplx, Accentfouts, Accentfron, Accentga132, Accentgangx, Accentgbird941, Accentge89, Accentge1340, Accentgend123, Accentger801, Accentgionkss, Accentgirl3, Accentgirl7890, Accentglevn, Accentgo98, Accentgoat, _ Accentgold1016, Accentgon23, Accentgons, Accentguilty, Accentguinhd, Accentguish, Accentgvil99, Accenthaavy4, Accentham1111, Accenthauss89, Accenthden, Accenthdogzz, Accenthead431, Accenthead714, Accentheart0607, Accentheeks3, Accenthient, Accenthimb, Accenthlar, Accenthlaw, Accenthli3, Accentho92, Accenthoist, Accenthomp64, Accenthris66jr, Accenthristmc, Accenthter247, Accenthuby17, Accenthuzz15, Accentiionz, Accentja007, Accentja44, Accentja1002, Accentja1542, Accentja, _212, Accentjack2013, Accentjin2552, Accentjoe199202, Accentjowny, Accentka95, Accentkan0088, Accentkandy333, Accentkarzpl, Accentkasm3, Accentke54, Accentkej1, Accentkels, Accentken75, Accentker, _951, Accentket1829, Accentkhawk, Accentkie10, Accentkie1234, Accentkiectrl, Accentkies777xxx, Accentkingfyp0s, Accentkirs, Accentkits99, Accentkles830, Accentkman220, Accentknight64x, Accentkody, Accentkor568, Accentkraft, _02, Accentksun, Accentla987, Accentla1228, Accentlamb, Accentlamb1212, Accentlas1198, Accentlash, _111, Accentle50, Accentlex10334, Accentlez15, Accentli11, Accentlianb, Accentlid1, Accentlip1921, Accentlog101, Accentlordpvp, Accentlorrg, Accentluckyg, Accentlue220, Accentmack40, Accentman203, Accentman251, Accentman12365, Accentmer159, Accentmes8642, Accentmiightyjp, Accentmkskl, Accentmn5988, Accentmout, Accentmying, Accentne2400, Accentne, _nz, Accentnecrft, Accentneers15, Accentnenn, Accentneo1212, Accentner01, Accentner15, Accentner239, Accentnestsky, Accentnic16, Accentnidr, Accentnight11, Accentniic, Accentnix70, Accentnix1958, Accentnoisy, Accentnoobz0r, Accentnor1468, Accentnusxd27, Accentouest, Accentpa123, Accentpaul7287, Accentpaz655, Accentpearcy, Accentpeezyyy, Accentper2231, Accentper3086, Accentper3615, Accentpes8, Accentpie1011, Accentpie2580, Accentple360, Accentpop12345, Accentpound65, Accentpro2014, Accentpros1, Accentr1126pw, Accentra1125, Accentraath89, Accentraf33, Accentraft4, Accentraldz, Accentre384, Accentre5855, Accentreat3579, Accentreats, Accentreegs417, Accentreen808, Accentreidtj, Accentrekd98, Accentrendk7, Accentrer001, Accentrew911, Accentrey98, Accentrhod, Accentriapt, Accentric55010, Accentriend, Accentriez, Accentrin6, Accentrisnyc, Accentritz, Accentrius125, Accentrocks101, Accentrohk, Accentroin08, Accentrold1999, Accentron999, Accentrsup, Accentruehl10, Accentsa100, Accentsaac39, Accentsam18, Accentsbill, Accentse7777777, Accentsenv, Accentser8, Accentser360, Accentser519, Accentsgirl657, Accentshark7, Accentsiasm, Accentsnotch, Accentson33, Accentswords1, Accentsystm, Accenttaa0, Accenttac0, Accenttail123, Accenttainky, _cz, Accenttainx3, Accenttan200, Accenttarch, Accenttdog, _222, Accentteam, _ Accenttect97, Accentted4, Accentter117, Accentter3500, Accentter6000, Accentterd1, Accentthart, Accenttian14, Accenttikhd, Accenttin298, Accenttincz, Accenttinny, Accenttion29, Accenttiqqz, Accenttist3, Accenttkam, _ Accenttle867, Accentto27, Accentton24, Accenttrand, Accenttro10, Accentturky8, Accenttuu05, Accentuaicd, Accentueabc, Accentva07, Accentveep, Accentver223, Accentvidp1122, Accentvilly, Accentvinb, Accentvx2500, Accentwalsh10, Accentwan234, Accentwant, Accentward9, Accentwarf12, Accentweetx, Accentwis13n, Accentwolf, _ Accentword7, Accentxaiyth, Accentxar141, Accentxbox, Accentxi, _11, Accentxis87, Accentxross, Accenty1o1, Accentyan392, Accentybel, Accentyboxx, Accentyboy001, Accentyboy41, Accentyer208, Accentyer315, Accentyfan124, Accentyoomx, Accentyou2b, Accentytight, Accentyvong, Accentywolf, Accentza1526, Accentzedx, Accentzeey, Accentzio242, Accentzio1238jh, Accentzle, _ Accentzmag, Accentzoar, Accentzout and Accentzrob.
You can get "Sosa on da beat" on CD:
https://www.amazon.com/Sosa-Beat-SOSA/dp/B01ACNB50I
Yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah
I consider this a direct threat.
Music Publishing Company C owns the rest at 287,485:
https://promusicrights.com/search?type=work&s=publisher&h=14948031506062019015027
https://promusicrights.com/search?type=work&s=writer&h=21683212506062018016123
So... 2.5M fake songs no one can play, then MAYBE a few hundreds others. F.R.A.U.D. Spell it out. TAKE ME TO COURT OVER THIS JAKEY!!! I'LL RUIN EVERYTHING FOR YOU. GIVE ME ACCESS TO THE JUDGE!!!
Here is a song with all them on it:
https://promusicrights.com/work/63859813112019112329
First judge he tried it on sniffed it out, reprimanded him, he played dumb and dismissed it with prejudice. He of course, did it again anyways
Fun news, Jake fixed the music works list and you can now see that basically the entire catalog is AI music not available to play at all, published under "Publishing Company A" owned by Jake P Noch (now inactive) and the writer is "Brazy Records LLC" also owned by Jake P Noch.
https://promusicrights.com/work/1911101813201884422
Click around, why are 2,208,505/2,208,478 songs of his works library songs unavailable and owned 100% by Jake?
Publishing Company A:
https://promusicrights.com/search?type=work&s=publisher&h=14948031506062019015026
Brazy:
https://promusicrights.com/search?type=work&s=writer&h=21683212506062018016124
Go ahead, try and find a meaningful number of those songs online. FYI, EVERYONE Jake is suing has received a nice packet of this data. In court, he will be unable to prove his marketing claims of 2.5M songs they gained access to by signing up for an account. If you cannot fulfill your end of contract, you don't get the money. Worse off, this is proof Jakey has committed absolute fraud claiming to be the 3rd largest US PRO, but nothing on the library is available to use... because he doesn't make it available.
Jakey's hosed here folks. Cooked. Done. BBQ'd. Someone get a wwwwhhhhhaaaaammmmmbulence for this loser.
Love how Jake used the court to submit and add language after the fact in an attempt to clean up his previous actions. He's slim, he's shady, but he ain't no slim shady.
Not sure if you all noticed, but I did (and so did the SEC). Jakey and his idiot lawyer tried to reclassify the old Reg A sales as 3a10, you can't do that. Why? Because he didn't pay .03 for them and used the Reg A exemption to sell them in 2023. You can't just go "Ope, I broke the law, lets redo that 8 months later with another illegal exemption." Tick toc Jakey... tic tok...
Exemptions are not retroactive.
OPE, there goes .27's. MM's will bail soon, take it while you can Jakey!!! Or you will be selling in the teens instead!
I bet those bids in the .20's are looking mighty tasty to Jake. Biggest vol bids he has since since the RS... ETA to bid wack? Probably can get like $3-5k in the .20's alone before the MM"s move away
Jake P. Noch - SONG CEO part 2
https://www.billboard.com/pro/spotify-indie-label-streaming-fraud-millions-fake-accounts-countersuit/
Spotify Countersues Indie Label, Alleging Massive Streaming Fraud & Millions of Fake Accounts
Spotify has countersued indie label Sosa Entertainment and its founder Jake Noch, alleging massive streaming fraud, unjust enrichment and the creation of millions of fake accounts to generate…
In November 2019, indie hip-hop label Sosa Entertainment and its founder, 20-year-old Jake Noch, filed a lawsuit against Spotify that alleged the streaming service failed to pay royalties on over 550 million streams of its music. The suit, which was also brought on behalf of Noch’s PRO Pro Music Rights (which was later removed), sought $150,000 in statutory damages for each infringement, and alleged that Spotify removed its music not because it detected “abnormal streaming activity,” as the service claimed, but because it was trying to dodge paying royalties on the streams.
Now, Spotify has fired back with a countersuit alleging that Noch “designed a scheme to artificially generate hundreds of millions of fraudulent streams” in order to “manipulate Spotify’s system to extract undeserved royalties at the expense of hardworking artists and songwriters.” The filing, which is supported by screenshots of messages allegedly between Noch and a “bot farmer” and charts that show streams on Noch’s music go from zero into the hundreds of thousands in a matter of days, also alleges that Noch directed the bot farmer to create millions of fake accounts and changed the names of songs in his catalog to closely resemble those of established hit songs, like XXXTentacion’s “SAD!” and DJ Snake’s “Taki Taki.”
Spotify has countersued indie label Sosa Entertainment and its founder Jake Noch, alleging massive streaming fraud, unjust enrichment and the creation of millions of fake accounts to generate…
BY DAN RYS
In November 2019, indie hip-hop label Sosa Entertainment and its founder, 20-year-old Jake Noch, filed a lawsuit against Spotify that alleged the streaming service failed to pay royalties on over 550 million streams of its music. The suit, which was also brought on behalf of Noch’s PRO Pro Music Rights (which was later removed), sought $150,000 in statutory damages for each infringement, and alleged that Spotify removed its music not because it detected “abnormal streaming activity,” as the service claimed, but because it was trying to dodge paying royalties on the streams.
Now, Spotify has fired back with a countersuit alleging that Noch “designed a scheme to artificially generate hundreds of millions of fraudulent streams” in order to “manipulate Spotify’s system to extract undeserved royalties at the expense of hardworking artists and songwriters.” The filing, which is supported by screenshots of messages allegedly between Noch and a “bot farmer” and charts that show streams on Noch’s music go from zero into the hundreds of thousands in a matter of days, also alleges that Noch directed the bot farmer to create millions of fake accounts and changed the names of songs in his catalog to closely resemble those of established hit songs, like XXXTentacion’s “SAD!” and DJ Snake’s “Taki Taki.”
Indie Hip-Hop Label Files Suit Against Spotify Over Catalog Takedown
Noch, who lists himself as the chief executive of Sosa and Pro Music Rights, as well as a handful of additional music companies, has quite the proud litigious history, having released several press releases touting lawsuits against Spotify, Apple, Google, YouTube, Amazon, SoundCloud, Pandora, Deezer, iHeartRadio and more. Pro Music Rights claims a database of some 2 million tracks, including more than 23,000 by various artists using some form of the name “LEGATO,” like LEGATO_DIMY, LEGATODE45, LEGATODI001, LEGATOGILL2002 and LEGATOKAL999, to name a few.
According to Spotify’s counterclaim, filed Monday (May 18), the service first detected artificial streaming activity on Noch’s content in March 2016 and eventually banned his music from the service, before extending that ban to all content related to Noch. Noch then tried to “smuggle” the content back onto the service using slightly different names and created millions of fake accounts to stream that music.
In June 2016, a whistleblower contacted Spotify with screenshots that purported to show Noch directing the person to create millions (direct quote: “i need millions”) of fake accounts. And while Spotify had identified the fraud a few months prior, the company had already paid a small amount of royalties to Sosa and Noch — royalties that otherwise would have gone to legitimate songwriters with songs being streamed by legitimate fans. According to the complaint, for one of Noch’s albums that jumped from zero streams to more than 400,000 in just days, 99% of its streams came from Spotify’s ad-supported free tier and from accounts registered to male users in the United States, a pattern that was also found for other works.
Noch then changed distributors and changed the names of some of his companies in order to dodge Spotify’s fraud detection systems, with slightly different artist names, song titles and cover artwork. In one section of the complaint, attorneys wrote that “analysts at Spotify found that 5,500 ‘users’ streaming one of the Sosa albums ‘originated’ from a small American town with a total population of 10,000. For that album, the stream count jumped from zero to 749,000 streams in a span of only two days… This pattern is highly anomalous and not at all correlated to any possible pattern of genuine streaming activity.”
In another example from the complaint, in what the filing calls “title track parasitism,” Noch and Sosa uploaded tracks called “SAD!” with the same punctuation as the XXXTentacion hit, and “Taki Take,” shortly after the similarly-named DJ Snake song reached the top 20 of the Billboard Hot 100. Some of the tracks that Noch and Sosa would release on Spotify were AI-generated sound loops.
In all, Spotify’s counterclaim seeks relief for fraud, fraudulent concealment, breach of contract, indemnification, unjust enrichment and deceptive business practices. As another line in the complaint reads, “This was one of the most egregious fraudulent streaming operations from a single rights holder that Spotify had to deal with in its company’s history.”
After the publication of this story, Noch provided a comment to Billboard which reads, in part, “Spotify’s claims are laughable… I also greatly look forward to the day we get to go to court, and I hope that all of Spotify’s shareholders will pay close attention to these cases… Time will prove that we are right.”
Jake P. Noch - SONG CEO
https://www.vice.com/en/article/v7gmvd/spotify-sues-self-described-music-prodigy-who-allegedly-ran-royalties-scam
Spotify Sues Self-Described 'Music Prodigy' Who Allegedly Ran Royalties Scam
Spotify says Jake Noch "[generated] hundreds of millions of fraudulent streams" and engaged in "title track parasitism" among other fraudulent practices on its platform.
JC
By Jelisa Castrodale
May 19, 2020, 4:38pm
Last November, the 20-year-old head of indie hip-hop label Sosa Entertainment filed a massive (and massively complicated) lawsuit against Spotify, alleging that the digital music service hadn't paid royalties on more than 550 million streams of its songs. According to Billboard, Sosa Entertainment founder Jake Noch also named his other company, PRO Music Rights, as a plaintiff in the lawsuit, and the co-plaintiffs sought millions of dollars in damages, asking for $150,000 for each infringement.
Noch's lawsuit accused Spotify of a number of transgressions, including unfair and deceptive business practices, willfully removing Sosa Entertainment's content, "obliterating" his expectations, and refusing to pay royalties. In a statement, Noch said that he was willing to "fight to the end" if it meant that Spotify would ultimately compensate the artists who were affected.
"I have a duty to see this through so that I can pay my artists what they are owed from Spotify," he said. "I know others feel the same way as I blaze this trail for the music community, who I know is behind me and roots for our success in bringing down Spotify."
Part of Noch's problems with the company started in the spring of 2017 when Spotify removed all of Sosa Entertainment's song's from its servers and "blanket banned" Noch and his companies from using the platform going forward. According to Noch—who describes himself as a "musical prodigy" in his lawsuit—Spotify informed him that the songs were removed because of "abnormal streaming activity," but the company didn't give him the opportunity to explain what could've caused the weird-looking streaming data. Noch has alleged that Spotify just "fabricated a reason" to kick him off the platform, in an attempt to avoid having to pay the royalties that he was due.
But in its own countersuit, filed on Monday, Spotify says no, it was just because of the abnormal streaming, and also because Noch allegedly "designed a scheme to artificially generate hundreds of millions of fraudulent streams" in order to game the system and rack up a ton of royalty payments.
"Starting in 2016, Noch designed a scheme to artificially generate hundreds of millions of fraudulent streams on songs he had seeded on Spotify’s online music-streaming service," the company's complaint reads. "Noch’s objective was plain: to manipulate Spotify’s system to extract undeserved royalties at the expense of hardworking artists and songwriters."
Billboard reports that Spotify removed Noch's content from its platform after being contacted by a whistleblower who claimed that Noch had instructed a bot farmer to create literally millions of fake accounts to stream songs from the Sosa Entertainment catalog. Spotify's own analysts became suspicious when one of Noch's records went from zero streams to 400,000 in under a week, while a second album racked up 749,000 streams in two days. (Spotify also apparently determined that 5,500 of the accounts that played the latter record supposedly all lived in the same American town—even though the town's total population was just around 10,000 people.)
The company has also accused Noch of "title track parasitism," which involves uploading songs with the same name and punctuation of legitimate hit songs. Spotify's legal filing identified two "AI-generated sound loops" that had been given the same name as then-popular tracks by DJ Snake and XXXTentacion.
"This was one of the most egregious fraudulent streaming operations from a single rights holder that Spotify had to deal with in its company’s history," Spotify wrote in its complaint. The company's countersuit is asking for compensation for a long list of Noch's alleged transgressions, including fraud, fraudulent concealment, breach of contract, indemnification, unjust enrichment and deceptive business practices.
Damn, most 20-year-olds can only dream of being dragged that hard by an international streaming service. A musical prodigy, indeed.
Justice and preventing scammers is always worthwhile for those who can think outside themselves. I am one of those people, good before personal benefit. Not something you'd ever understand.
99% of the OTC is just failure and I trade them. The scammers who seek to abuse the system can get the justice they deserve. Again, someone so selfish would never get it...
I'm not understanding how it benefits you, though. Perhaps some day I would like to do what you do, but it doesn't seem like it. Trading the stock is much more beneficial and rewarding. After a few years of research, you can grasp the concepts of what makes tickers go up and down. It's then easy to plan what the stock will do in the near future. It seems to be the opposite way of how you think which is why I'm having a very hard time understanding why someone would put so much time into something for a negative outcome? Please help me think of why someone would pursue such an endeavor. lol
Jake has plenty of theories with no proof to back it up as where others have plenty of facts with proof. He's just another one of those conspiracy theorist nut jobs.
Fun news, a group that Jakey's idiot lawyer reached out to directly to coordinate an attach against me... well one of them is in court today because he serially harassed someone he is convinced is me. He claimed I am one person controlling +400 accounts, just like Jakey. Here is what mentally ill conspiracy theories get you folks. Take note, the people who come after me end up in legal trouble.
Jakey, might wanna check in on your biggest fan pushing your same agenda... he's going to have a restraining order against him and much worse to follow. You think you have the law behind me, but all I do is keep winning.
The only thing profitable are the shares he dumps into the market to stuff his pockets with cash because the so called company certainly isn't worth a 💩
Love how he never announces or mentions any figures on how much the royalty payments received are. Only take 40 years to break even on what he paid for the stake in it.
Jakey's gotta be down bad trying to pump Listerine payments still, on a Friday, down another 15%. DOWN BAD!
Is Jake buying shares back to avoid the share price falling to below one cent ?
Odd to see the selling suddenly stop and then roughly the same number of shares being bought after the shares fell so much so quickly
Can’t help feeling a BIG sales dump is planned for coming days
Followers
|
173
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
0
|
Posts (Total)
|
10545
|
Created
|
02/04/11
|
Type
|
Free
|
Moderators tdbowieknife Dragon Lady |
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |