Notice2026-20537
Music Streaming Fraud
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
October 7, 2026
Issuing agencies
Library of CongressCopyright Office, Library of Congress
Abstract
Pursuant to a congressional request, the United States Copyright Office is soliciting information from the public regarding issues related to music streaming fraud.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 193 (Wednesday, October 7, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 193 (Wednesday, October 7, 2026)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64188-64192]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-20537]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
Copyright Office
[Docket No. 2026-6]
Music Streaming Fraud
AGENCY: U.S. Copyright Office, Library of Congress.
ACTION: Notice of inquiry.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Pursuant to a congressional request, the United States
Copyright Office is soliciting information from the public regarding
issues related to music streaming fraud.
DATES: Written comments must be received no later than 11:59 p.m.
Eastern Time on November 23, 2026. Written reply comments must be
received no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on December 21, 2026.
ADDRESSES: For reasons of government efficiency, the Copyright Office
is using the <a href="http://regulations.gov">regulations.gov</a> system for the submission and posting of
public comments in this proceeding. All comments should be submitted
electronically through <a href="http://regulations.gov">regulations.gov</a>. Specific instructions for
submitting comments are available on the Office's website at <a href="https://www.copyright.gov/policy/music-streaming-fraud">https://www.copyright.gov/policy/music-streaming-fraud</a>. If electronic
submission of comments is not feasible due to lack of access to a
computer or the internet, please contact the Office using the contact
information below for special instructions.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rhea Efthimiadis, Assistant to the
General Counsel, by email at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#b7e2e4f4f8f0d2d9d2c5d6dbf4d8c2d9c4d2dbf7d4d8c7cec5ded0dfc399d0d8c1"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c99c9a8a868eaca7acbba8a58aa6bca7baaca589aaa6b9b0bba0aea1bde7aea6bf">[email protected]</span></a> or by
telephone at (202) 707-8350.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Earlier this year, the United States Copyright Office (``Office'')
received a letter from Representative Scott Fitzgerald (the
``Congressional Request'') expressing concerns over streaming fraud and
its impact on royalties for sound recordings and musical works.\1\ The
Congressional Request asked the Office to ``examine the prevalence of
streaming fraud across digital platforms and how it may be affecting
the music industry as a whole.'' \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Letter from Rep. Scott Fitzgerald, Comm. on the Judiciary,
to Shira Perlmutter, Register of Copyrights and Dir., U.S. Copyright
Office at 1-4 (May 21, 2026) (``Congressional Request''), <a href="https://www.copyright.gov/policy/music-streaming-fraud/usco-letter-on-music-streaming-fraud.pdf">https://www.copyright.gov/policy/music-streaming-fraud/usco-letter-on-music-streaming-fraud.pdf</a>.
\2\ Id. at 1-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to the Congressional Request, this notice provides
background on streaming fraud and the music industry. The notice
solicits public comments that, together with the Office's own research,
may contribute to Congress's understanding of streaming fraud, current
efforts to curb this problem, and potential solutions.
A. Economic Importance of Music Streaming
Current consumption of recorded music is driven largely by digital
streaming.\3\ The Digital Media Association estimates that ``streaming
[is] now driving around 70% of global sales,'' making it a significant
contributor to the music economy's
[[Page 64189]]
overall health.\4\ For sound recording copyright owners (e.g., record
labels), the latest figures place streaming-specific revenues at
approximately $9.5 billion domestically \5\ and $22 billion
globally.\6\ While public data about streaming-specific revenues for
musical works is not available, total revenue for their copyright
owners (e.g., music publishers) is reported to be approximately $7.3
billion domestically \7\ and $10 billion globally.\8\ Publicly
available sources predict that music streaming revenue will grow
significantly over the next decade.\9\ Unfortunately, these benefits
can be undercut by streaming fraud.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See U.S. Copyright Office, Copyright and the Music
Marketplace 70 (2015), <a href="https://perma.cc/RP5F-K779">https://perma.cc/RP5F-K779</a> (``In recent years
there has been a profound shift in the way music is consumed--from
purchases of physical albums, to downloads of digital singles, to
on-demand access through digital streaming services.'').
\4\ Digi. Media Ass'n (``DIMA''), DIMA Annual Report 2025 20
(2025), <a href="https://perma.cc/NB68-DU2L">https://perma.cc/NB68-DU2L</a>.
\5\ Recording Indus. Ass'n of Am. (``RIAA''), RIAA Year-End
Recorded Music Revenue Report (2025), <a href="https://perma.cc/R3CD-U3CF">https://perma.cc/R3CD-U3CF</a>;
see Lauryn Sink, US Recorded Music 2025 Annual Revenue Achieves New
High, MusicRow (Mar. 16, 2026), <a href="https://perma.cc/8RCG-P68Y">https://perma.cc/8RCG-P68Y</a>
(``According to the RIAA 2025 Year-End Recorded Music Revenue
Report, the US wholesale annual revenue achieved a record high of
$11.5 billion last year. Last year, streaming revenues grew to $9.5
billion and for the fifth straight year, streaming represented 82%
of total US revenue.''); see also Ariel King, RIAA 2026 Mid-Year
Report: Streaming Growth Drives Revenue to $6 Billion, CD Sales
Increase More Than 50%, Billboard (Sep. 1, 2026), <a href="https://www.billboard.com/pro/riaa-2026-mid-year-report/">https://www.billboard.com/pro/riaa-2026-mid-year-report/</a> (reporting that the
RIAA's 2026 Mid-Year Report reflected a 4.7% increase of total
streaming revenue).
\6\ See, e.g., Global Music Report 2026: Global Recorded Music
Revenues Grow 6.4% as Record Companies Drive Innovation, Int'l Fed'n
of the Phonographic Indus. (``IFPI'') (Mar. 18, 2026), <a href="https://perma.cc/B23V-ZHNN">https://perma.cc/B23V-ZHNN</a> (``Total streaming revenues surpassed US$22
billion and accounted for 69.6% of global recorded music income.'').
\7\ US Music Publishing Revenues Hit $7.3B in 2025, NMPA Reveals
at Annual Meeting Honoring P!nk, Julian Bunetta and Harvey Mason
Jr., Nat'l Music Publishers' Ass'n (``NMPA'') (June 11, 2026),
<a href="https://perma.cc/YL6D-CQRZ">https://perma.cc/YL6D-CQRZ</a>; Press Release, Int'l Confederation of
Societies of Authors and Composers (``CISAC''), Statement on CISAC
Global Collections Report 2025 (Nov. 5, 2025), <a href="https://perma.cc/JX2G-N486">https://perma.cc/JX2G-N486</a> (``Streaming and subscription services now represent more
than a third of total global collections income, reflecting a seven-
fold increase (+596.2%) in digital revenues since 2015.'').
\8\ Omdia: Music Publishing Revenue Growth to Outshine Recorded-
Music Over the Next Five Years, Omdia (Oct. 20, 2025), <a href="https://perma.cc/KA38-898B">https://perma.cc/KA38-898B</a> (``[G]lobal music publisher revenue will top the
$10bn mark for the first time this year. Moreover, revenue is set to
rise annually for the next five years. Total income is projected to
exceed $13bn for the first time in 2029 and then reach the $14bn
milestone the following year.'').
\9\ See, e.g., Music Streaming Market Size, Share and Growth
Analysis, SkyQuest Tech. (Nov. 2025), <a href="https://perma.cc/8J42-GVZK">https://perma.cc/8J42-GVZK</a>;
Music Streaming Market Size & Share--Growth Analysis and Forecast
2027-2036, Rsch. Nester (Aug. 31, 2026), <a href="https://perma.cc/LEA3-NJC2">https://perma.cc/LEA3-NJC2</a>
(valuing streaming market size as $65 billion in 2026 and
forecasting a market size of $279.41 billion in 2036); Music
Streaming Market (2026-2033), Grand View Rsch., <a href="https://perma.cc/K4VM-F65K">https://perma.cc/K4VM-F65K</a> (last visited Sep. 25, 2026) (calculating music streaming
revenue at $54.1 billion in 2025 and projecting growth to $158.1
billion in 2033); Elizabeth Dilts Marshall, Global Recorded Music
Retail Revenue to Top $121 Billion by 2033, MIDiA Report Says,
Billboard (Aug. 13, 2026), <a href="https://www.billboard.com/pro/recorded-music-revenue-more-than-double-2033-report/">https://www.billboard.com/pro/recorded-music-revenue-more-than-double-2033-report/</a> (reflecting MIDiA's
projection that, ``[b]y 2033, global recorded music revenues are
expected to grow by 62.9% to $121.1 billion, from $74.3 billion in
2025,'' and that ``streaming will continue to be the primary driver
of growth'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. How Music Streaming Fraud Operates
Music streaming fraud \10\ can be defined as ``the illegitimate
practice of using deceptive, inappropriate, or unpermitted methods to
artificially increase the number of streams a song or album receives in
order to skew public perception of notoriety, to gain financial
rewards, or any other benefit(s) not otherwise obtained by legitimate
means.'' \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Streaming fraud may also be referred to as ``stream
manipulation'' or ``artificial streaming'' and be used as a blanket
statement to describe various criminal offenses. See Sealed
Indictment at 2-17, U.S. v. Smith, No. 24-cr-504 (S.D.N.Y. Sep. 4,
2024) (``Smith Indictment''), Doc. No. 3, <a href="https://perma.cc/RQL5-6T6Q">https://perma.cc/RQL5-6T6Q</a>
(discussing a ``streaming fraud'' indictment alleging conspiracy to
commit wire fraud under 18 U.S.C. 1349, wire fraud under 18 U.S.C. 2
and 18 U.S.C. 1343, and money laundering conspiracy under 18 U.S.C.
1956(h)).
\11\ Streaming Fraud 101, Music Fights Fraud All., <a href="https://perma.cc/M2GA-AERD">https://perma.cc/M2GA-AERD</a> (defining ``streaming fraud'') (last visited Sep.
25, 2026).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Streaming services commonly pay for their use of copyrighted works
by dedicating a percentage of their revenue to royalty pools, which are
then used to pay various rights owners.\12\ Those royalties may be paid
directly to those rightsholders, or may first flow through different
intermediaries, including distributors \13\ and statutory collectives,
such as SoundExchange and the Mechanical Licensing Collective
(``MLC''), and other collective management organizations (``CMOs'') or
performance rights organizations (``PROs'').\14\ Generally, under this
``pro-rata'' system, the more a song is played on a streaming service,
the more revenue that song's rightsholders will receive.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See Smith Indictment at 2.
\13\ Independent musicians may use music distributors to deliver
their sound recordings to streaming services and collect any
royalties owed. Publishing administrators similarly manage
permissions and royalties for a song's musical work. See Donald S.
Passman, All You Need to Know About the Music Business 209-10, 310
(2024). This notice uses the term ``distributor'' broadly to include
both sound recording distributors and musical work administration
services.
\14\ See id. at 2-3.
\15\ See, e.g., id. at 2; Congressional Request at 2; see also
37 CFR 385.2 (defining ``Play'' for the statutory mechanical license
as an eligible stream or limited download ``lasting 30 seconds or
more and, if a track lasts in its entirety under 30 seconds . . .
the entire duration of the track,'' but excluding a play caused by
user manipulation); 37 CFR 370.4(b) (defining ``Play frequency'' for
certain services using the section 114 license as ``the number of
times a sound recording is publicly performed by [an eligible
service] during the relevant period, without respect to the number
of listeners receiving the sound recording'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unfortunately, this system can incentivize bad actors to
fraudulently or deceptively inflate ``plays'' of their songs, diverting
money from rights owners of legitimately streamed works. Streaming
fraudsters use bot farms,\16\ click farms,\17\ playlist stuffing,\18\
account hijacking,\19\ or other methods of user manipulation \20\ to
inflate their songs' plays. These activities are frequently
accomplished by unethical marketing companies.\21\ Streaming fraudsters
may also engage in ``copyright fraud,'' a term that, as used
[[Page 64190]]
here, would include claiming others' original works as their own or
uploading and claiming manipulated versions of others' works, sometimes
called ``carbon copying'' or ``ghost tracking.'' \22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ Clovis McEvoy, How AI-Generated Songs are Fueling the Rise
of Streaming Farms, WIPO Mag. (May 27, 2025), <a href="https://perma.cc/Q7JQ-62CE">https://perma.cc/Q7JQ-62CE</a> (``Using armies of bots or forming entire streaming farms,
fraudsters artificially inflate streaming numbers, diverting
billions of dollars from the finite royalty pool--funds that should
be allocated to right holders such as music creators, artists,
labels, or publishers--into their own bank accounts.''); JC Sanchez,
How to Identify Fake Streams and What to Do, Orphiq (July 23, 2026),
<a href="https://perma.cc/2VJN-9VUH">https://perma.cc/2VJN-9VUH</a> (``Bot farms . . . range from basic
scripts to operations that mimic human listening patterns with
varied session lengths and skip rates.'').
\17\ JC Sanchez, How to Identify Fake Streams and What to Do,
Orphiq (July 23, 2026), <a href="https://perma.cc/2VJN-9VUH">https://perma.cc/2VJN-9VUH</a> (``Click farms
use human workers in low-cost labor markets who create accounts and
stream specific songs.''); Eric Drott, Fake Streams, Listening Bots,
and Click Farms: Counterfeiting Attention in the Music Economy, 38
a.m. Music 153, 168-70 (2020), <a href="https://perma.cc/D7FS-UDX9">https://perma.cc/D7FS-UDX9</a> (defining
``click farms'' and describing the difficulty in identifying all the
members of a click farm's supply chain); see also Meghan O'Donnell,
Streaming Fraud in 2026: The $2B Problem & How the Music Industry is
Fighting Back, Trolley (Mar. 30, 2026), <a href="https://perma.cc/4UXV-5J4C">https://perma.cc/4UXV-5J4C</a>
(``Click farmers use smartphones, computers, and tablets to form a
network of devices that play given songs on repeat to artificially
boost streaming numbers. The techniques employed make these listens
appear human-generated, creating the illusion of a large number of
genuine listeners.'').
\18\ JC Sanchez, How to Identify Fake Streams and What to Do,
Orphiq (July 23, 2026), <a href="https://perma.cc/2VJN-9VUH">https://perma.cc/2VJN-9VUH</a> (``Playlist
stuffing adds songs to playlists that receive bot traffic.'').
\19\ Id. (``Account hijacking uses compromised accounts to
stream songs without the real owner knowing. The streams look like
they come from real users because the accounts are real.'').
\20\ 37 CFR 385.2 (defining ``User Manipulation'' for the
statutory mechanical license as ``any behavior that artificially
distorts the number of Plays, including, but not limited to, the use
of manual (e.g., click farms) or automated (e.g., bots) means'').
\21\ See Aruni Soni et al., This Masquerade: Streaming Fraud and
Copyright, 72 J. Copyright Soc'y 1005, 1006-08 (2025), <a href="https://perma.cc/77EV-GKEL">https://perma.cc/77EV-GKEL</a>; Eric Drott, Fake Streams, Listening Bots, and
Click Farms: Counterfeiting Attention in the Music Economy, 38 a.m.
Music 153, 162-63 (2020), <a href="https://perma.cc/D7FS-UDX9">https://perma.cc/D7FS-UDX9</a> (describing the
advertising campaign of several media companies offering different
services to increase social media influence on streaming platforms
through fraudulent techniques).
\22\ See Meghan O'Donnell, Streaming Fraud in 2026: The $2B
Problem & How the Music Industry is Fighting Back, Trolley (Mar. 30,
2026), <a href="https://perma.cc/4UXV-5J4C">https://perma.cc/4UXV-5J4C</a> (``[T]he idea is relatively
simple--a fraudster takes an artist's original work, manipulates it
enough to fool the algorithm (e.g., speeding it up or slowing it
down), and uploads it as their own recording.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Streaming fraud is already harming copyright owners, performers,
songwriters, digital music providers \23\ (``DMPs''), and others. While
the primary harm is the dilution of the royalty revenue pool,\24\ it
can also cause secondary harms, such as affecting where songs are
placed on a DMP's playlist or in an algorithm's queue; \25\
``distorting the [streaming] data artists and venues use to make key
business decisions,'' including ``when and where to tour''; \26\
``reduc[ing] the likelihood of music fans discovering talented, lesser-
known artists''; \27\ or causing other reputational or financial
harms.\28\ As the fraud detection platform Beatdapp has explained,
streaming fraud ``does more than just drain revenue,'' ``[i]t poisons
your analytics, wastes marketing spend, compromises user trust in your
charts and leaderboards, and leads to inaccurate payouts that damage
partner relationships.'' \29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ Also referred to as ``digital service providers''
(``DSPs'') or simply ``streaming services.''
\24\ See End Streaming Fraud, Music Bus. Worldwide (Feb. 26,
2026), <a href="https://perma.cc/AWJ7-ZXSK">https://perma.cc/AWJ7-ZXSK</a> (``Because streaming services pay
rightsholders from a finite pool of revenue, income is being
diverted from legitimate creators who attracted users,
subscriptions, and advertising to these platforms in the first
place.''); Daniel Brooks, Streaming Fraud Crackdown 2026: How
Spotify, Apple, and Distributors are Killing Fake Streams, Chartlex
(Apr. 28, 2026), <a href="https://perma.cc/X56B-T3XA">https://perma.cc/X56B-T3XA</a> (``[E]very dollar
fraudulently extracted is a dollar pulled from the legitimate
royalty pool that pays everyone else.'').
\25\ See Music Observer Staff, How Music Streaming Fraud is
Impacting Artists and Fans Alike, Music Observer (Jan. 23, 2026),
<a href="https://perma.cc/AH3J-EZTB">https://perma.cc/AH3J-EZTB</a> (``When fake streams flood the system,
legitimate artists get pushed down the algorithm.'').
\26\ Congressional Request at 3.
\27\ Meghan O'Donnell, Streaming Fraud in 2026: The $2B Problem
& How the Music Industry is Fighting Back, Trolley (Mar. 30, 2026),
<a href="https://perma.cc/4UXV-5J4C">https://perma.cc/4UXV-5J4C</a>.
\28\ See Sift Trust and Safety Team, Streaming Fraud: What it is
and How it Works, Sift (Aug. 4, 2025), <a href="https://perma.cc/7Z7Y-DFL2">https://perma.cc/7Z7Y-DFL2</a>
(noting streaming fraud's financial and reputational harms to
digital music providers (``DMPs'')).
\29\ Protect Your Platform with Unmatched Anomaly Detection,
Beatdapp, <a href="https://perma.cc/DH7A-CGNY">https://perma.cc/DH7A-CGNY</a> (last visited Sep. 25, 2026).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Combatting Music Streaming Fraud
Leaders from across the music industry have condemned streaming
fraud.\30\ As one music executive stated, ``[t]here aren't a lot of
advocates for fraud.'' \31\ Different industry sectors--including DMPs,
distributors, vendors, copyright owners, PROs and CMOs, and law
enforcement--have approached the problem in different ways. Below, the
Office has identified some publicly reported strategies used to combat
streaming fraud. These are intended to be illustrative, not exhaustive,
especially as not all such efforts have been made public.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ See, e.g., NMPA Inks Deals With Udio & KLAY, Marking First
Industry-Wide Licensing Pacts With Major AI Music Firms, NMPA (June
10, 2026), <a href="https://perma.cc/2JQV-Z7V3">https://perma.cc/2JQV-Z7V3</a> (statement of David Israelite,
President and CEO, NMPA); End Streaming Fraud, Music Bus. Worldwide
(Feb. 26, 2026), <a href="https://perma.cc/AWJ7-ZXSK">https://perma.cc/AWJ7-ZXSK</a> (op-ed by Victoria
Oakley, CEO, IFPI, and Mitch Glazier, CEO, RIAA); Daniel Tencer, Rob
Stringer says music streaming fraud `is a problem that must be
eliminated', calls for better payouts from short-form video
platforms, Music Bus. Worldwide (May 25, 2023), <a href="https://perma.cc/39BF-Y4NT">https://perma.cc/39BF-Y4NT</a> (``Fraud on key DSPs is a problem that must be eliminated
through aggressive enforcement by these DSPs and distributors, or by
changing payment methods [i.e., royalty payout models] to better
reduce the incentive for fraud.'') (statement of Rob Stringer,
Chairman, Sony Music Grp.); DIMA, DIMA Annual Report 2026 6 (June
2026), <a href="https://perma.cc/M4LA-WNL3">https://perma.cc/M4LA-WNL3</a> (agreeing that streaming fraud
``weakens the integrity of the music ecosystem: if left unmitigated,
it could distort royalty distributions, skew performance metrics,
and disadvantage artists and rightsholders who are operating
legitimately'').
\31\ Elias Leight, Beatdapp, Universal Music Group to
Collaborate in Fighting Streaming Fraud, Billboard (Jan. 19, 2024),
<a href="https://perma.cc/35UN-Y299">https://perma.cc/35UN-Y299</a> (statement of Michael Nash, Chief Digi.
Officer and EVP, Universal Music Grp.).
\32\ See, e.g., 91 FR 33208, 33214 (June 3, 2026) (noting the
Mechanical Licensing Collective's (``MLC'') belief that it ``must
keep specific [fraud] detection and prevention strategies
confidential to preserve their effectiveness'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DMPs have implemented strategies both internally and with outside
partners to combat streaming fraud. Internal approaches can include
daily evaluations of suspected artificial streams,\33\ including
analyzing metrics like listening time, users' geographic locations,
users' streams of specific artists, and the relationship of saves and
follows to total streams.\34\ DMPs have also imposed fines on uploaders
of artificially streamed songs.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ See Artificial Streaming and paid 3rd-party services that
guarantee streams, Spotify, <a href="https://perma.cc/8WWD-4L9E">https://perma.cc/8WWD-4L9E</a> (last visited
Sep. 25, 2026); Stuart Dredge, Apple Talks Music Fraud: `On Apple
Music Less Than 1% of Streams are Manipulated,' Music:)Ally (Jan.
21, 2025), <a href="https://perma.cc/5ZMR-UCUG">https://perma.cc/5ZMR-UCUG</a> (discussing Apple Music's
efforts).
\34\ See generally Daniel Brooks, Streaming Fraud Crackdown
2026: How Spotify, Apple, and Distributors are Killing Fake Streams,
Chartlex (Apr. 28, 2026), <a href="https://perma.cc/X56B-T3XA">https://perma.cc/X56B-T3XA</a>; JC Sanchez,
How to Identify Fake Streams and What to Do, Orphiq (July 23, 2026),
<a href="https://perma.cc/2VJN-9VUH">https://perma.cc/2VJN-9VUH</a>.
\35\ See, e.g., Chance Miller, Apple Music Doubles the Penalties
for Fraudulent Streaming, 9to5mac (Feb. 11, 2026), <a href="https://perma.cc/XS9U-GU7G">https://perma.cc/XS9U-GU7G</a> (``Apple's strategy in squashing Apple Music fraud
consists of a sliding scale of fines . . . When it was first
implemented, the fee was 5% and capped at 25%. As of this month
[February 2026], however, Apple has doubled the fee. It now starts
at 10% and is capped at 50%.''); Daniel Brooks, Streaming Fraud
Crackdown 2026: How Spotify, Apple, and Distributors are Killing
Fake Streams, Chartlex (Apr. 28, 2026), <a href="https://perma.cc/X56B-T3XA">https://perma.cc/X56B-T3XA</a>
(``Spotify now charges distributors a $10 fee per track with
detected fraudulent streams.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, DMPs are working with others to fight streaming fraud.
Some have empowered users and artists to report suspected streaming
fraud themselves,\36\ or partnered with vendors to detect and prevent
streaming fraud.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ Reporting Violations, SoundCloud, <a href="https://perma.cc/Z5C2-9VB8">https://perma.cc/Z5C2-9VB8</a> (last visited Sep. 25, 2026) (enabling users or artists to
report streaming fraud).
\37\ See, e.g., Protect Your Platform with Unmatched Anomaly
Detection, Beatdapp, <a href="https://perma.cc/DH7A-CGNY">https://perma.cc/DH7A-CGNY</a> (last visited Sep.
25, 2026) (explaining that its systems are appropriate for DMPs,
developers, and artists); Search, Pex, <a href="https://perma.cc/GV95-Z6Q8">https://perma.cc/GV95-Z6Q8</a>
(last visited Sep. 25, 2026) (explaining how its technology can find
alternate versions that do not match the original song). Vendors
also provide their fraud detection and prevention services to
distributors, copyright owners, and others. Elias Leight, Beatdapp,
Universal Music Group to Collaborate in Fighting Streaming Fraud,
Billboard (Jan. 19, 2024), <a href="https://perma.cc/35UN-Y299">https://perma.cc/35UN-Y299</a> (noting that
Universal Music Group and SoundExchange have engaged vendors to
fight streaming fraud); 91 FR 33208, 33214 (noting that the MLC
``engages with third-party vendors with fraud detection expertise
and pursues collaboration with other industry stakeholders to
bolster prevention and detection efforts'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Music distributors have taken various approaches to combatting
streaming fraud.\38\ They have bolstered their identity verification
departments, created ``Trust and Safety Departments,'' and implemented
``know your customer'' (KYC) protocols.\39\ Some require their clients
(songwriters or performing artists) to agree to standard contract terms
prohibiting streaming fraud \40\ and subjecting violators to
contractual penalties that range from
[[Page 64191]]
issuing warnings to closing accounts \41\ or imposing monetary
penalties.\42\ Despite these efforts, some ``music-streaming scammers''
are able to continue their ``lucrative schemes'' by ``bouncing from
distributor to distributor'' once they are detected--a problem that has
led at least one distributor to propose the creation of ``a worldwide
database of individuals found to be abusing the streaming system.''
\43\ The Music Fights Fraud Alliance, launched in 2023, was created to
enable distributors and DMPs to better coordinate their efforts to
combat streaming fraud.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ See, e.g., Eamonn Forde, AI, bot farms and innocent indie
victims: how music streaming became a hotbed of fraud and fakery,
The Guardian (June 3, 2025), <a href="https://perma.cc/JJT4-TP5A">https://perma.cc/JJT4-TP5A</a> (noting that
music distributor Fuga ``gives streaming patterns a `severity
score,' separating out `non-human listening patterns' to spot
fraud'') (quoting Darren Owen, COO, Fuga)).
\39\ Jorge Brea, Fighting Streaming Fraud at the Distributor
Level, SYMPHONIC BLOG (June 17, 2024), <a href="https://perma.cc/9583-6259">https://perma.cc/9583-6259</a>
(describing the company's ``know your customer'' protocols and
identification verification systems); Gabija Stankeviciute,
Streaming Fraud: How it Affects the Music Industry, Idenfy Blog
(June 23, 2026), <a href="https://perma.cc/ZN2A-ZZ7G">https://perma.cc/ZN2A-ZZ7G</a> (``The most effective
first step [to combatting streaming fraud] is lowering user
anonymity, which is why many companies rely on Know Your Customer
(KYC) measures, or identity verification . . . .'').
\40\ See Aruni Soni et al., This Masquerade: Streaming Fraud and
Copyright, 72 J. Copyright Soc'y 1005, 1007 (2025), <a href="https://perma.cc/77EV-GKEL">https://perma.cc/77EV-GKEL</a> (statement of Patra Sinner, Gen. Counsel,
Symphonic Distribution) (explaining that their company's template
contract addresses improper activity, including streaming fraud and
copyright infringement).
\41\ See, e.g., What is Artificial Streaming?, DistroKid,
<a href="https://perma.cc/LE53-GHDR">https://perma.cc/LE53-GHDR</a> (last visited Sep. 25, 2026); What's the
Deal With Streaming Fraud?, TuneCore, <a href="https://perma.cc/7J8Q-RKLM">https://perma.cc/7J8Q-RKLM</a>
(last visited Sep. 25, 2026).
\42\ What is Artificial Streaming?, CD Baby, <a href="https://perma.cc/93JE-3ZQ7">https://perma.cc/93JE-3ZQ7</a> (last updated Feb. 2026).
\43\ Sir Lucian Grainge's Royalty Payout Letter was a
`Hallelujah Moment' for Streaming's Anti-Fraud Movement, Music Bus.
Worldwide (Jan. 17, 2023), <a href="https://perma.cc/743T-YFVU">https://perma.cc/743T-YFVU</a> (statement of
Nick Dunn, CEO, Horus Music); see also Aruni Soni et al., This
Masquerade: Streaming Fraud and Copyright, 72 J. Copyright Soc'y
1005, 1016-17 (2025), <a href="https://perma.cc/77EV-GKEL">https://perma.cc/77EV-GKEL</a> (statement of Jon
Glass, Senior VP, Head of Digi. Legal Affairs, Warner Music Grp.)
(noting that ``information sharing is important'' to prevent
streaming fraud).
\44\ Dan Rys, Digital Music Companies Band Together to Combat
Streaming Fraud With New Task Force, Billboard (June 14, 2023),
<a href="https://www.billboard.com/pro/digital-music-companies-combat-streaming-fraud-initiative/">https://www.billboard.com/pro/digital-music-companies-combat-streaming-fraud-initiative/</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Entities representing copyright owners' interests have taken steps
to prevent both streaming and copyright fraud, including through data-
accuracy and related initiatives.\45\ Some copyright owners have
partnered with DMPs and distributors in their efforts \46\ and recently
IFPI announced the launch of its ``Streaming Integrity Initiative,''
joining copyright owners and distributors who have ``commit[ed] to
baseline practices to prevent, detect and respond to streaming fraud.''
\47\ Others have proposed creative solutions, such as replacing the
pro-rata royalty system with an artist- or user-centric model, to
prevent the dilution of royalties owed for legitimate plays.\48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ CISAC, Global Annual Report 2025 9, 20 (2025), <a href="https://perma.cc/VQ6W-TGW5">https://perma.cc/VQ6W-TGW5</a> (describing efforts to ``prevent fraud and
inaccurate data during the musical works registration process'');
ASCAP and BMI Announce Joint Task Force to Address Fraud, ASCAP (May
18, 2023), <a href="https://perma.cc/TGM9-STNB">https://perma.cc/TGM9-STNB</a> (noting focus on data
integrity and identity verification and validation and efforts
related to ``raising awareness around suspicious activity and
schemes'' and ``shar[ing] best practices'').
\46\ See, e.g., Press Release, Universal Music Grp., Statement
on Universal Music Group and Amazon Music Expand Global Relationship
(Dec. 22, 2024), <a href="https://perma.cc/T4F3-ZYKJ">https://perma.cc/T4F3-ZYKJ</a> (noting that
collaboration that would ``protect[ ] against fraud and
misattribution''). But see Bill Donahue, `AI-Generated Slop': UMG
Sues DistroKid for `Flooding' Streaming Platforms With Junk Music,
Billboard (Sep. 15, 2026), <a href="https://www.billboard.com/pro/universal-music-sues-distrokid-in-lawsuit-over-ai-songs/">https://www.billboard.com/pro/universal-music-sues-distrokid-in-lawsuit-over-ai-songs/</a> (reporting a
copyright owner's lawsuit against a distributor for copyright
infringement and Delaware Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act and
suggesting that the distributor ``help[ed] to saturate the market
with `mass AI-generated, SEO-optimized, and copyright-infringing
slop' that [was] deceptively passed off as human-created music''
(quoting Compl. at 3-4, UMG Recordings, Inc. v. Distrokid LLC, No.
26-cv-1156 (D. Del. Sep. 15, 2026), Doc. No. 1)).
\47\ Kristin Robinson, IFPI Launches Initiative to Combat
Streaming Fraud, Billboard (Sep. 14, 2026), <a href="https://www.billboard.com/pro/ifpi-initiative-fight-streaming-fraud/">https://www.billboard.com/pro/ifpi-initiative-fight-streaming-fraud/</a> (the
initiative's ``five core commitments'' involve ``Know Your
Customer'' checks, ``[c]ontent vetting,'' ``[d]etection,
investigation and mitigation of suspected fraud,'' ``[i]ntelligence
sharing,'' and ``[c]ontinuously strengthening and measuring anti-
fraud systems to address evolving threats'').
\48\ See Aruni Soni, et al., This Masquerade: Streaming Fraud
and Copyright, 72 J. Copyright Soc'y 1005, 1013-14 (2025), <a href="https://perma.cc/77EV-GKEL">https://perma.cc/77EV-GKEL</a> (statement of Jon Glass, Senior VP, Head of Digi.
Legal Affairs, Warner Music Grp.) (describing a royalty distribution
model where royalites are distributed according to each user's
plays, instead of dividing a larger, ``pooled group of revenue'' by
all users' plays).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Law enforcement agencies also play an important role.\49\ In one
recent high-profile case, the United States Department of Justice
indicted a defendant in North Carolina on charges of wire fraud,
conspiracy to commit wire fraud, and conspiracy to commit money
laundering related to streaming fraud.\50\ The defendant, Michael
Smith, had created thousands of ``bot'' accounts on streaming
platforms, used those accounts to stream his uploaded songs,\51\ and
fraudulently collected some $10 million in royalties.\52\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ U.S. Dep't of Just. (``DOJ''), Press Release, Statement on
North Carolina Musician Charged With Music Streaming Fraud Aided By
Artificial Intelligence (Sep. 4, 2024) (``DOJ Press Release''),
<a href="https://perma.cc/C6C7-HH32">https://perma.cc/C6C7-HH32</a>; see also Dylan Smith, Co-Conspirator
Details Emerge in Massive $10 Million Streaming Fraud Indictment--
Including the CEO of a Major AI Music Company, Digi. Music News
(Sep. 5, 2024), <a href="https://perma.cc/F67W-BKA2">https://perma.cc/F67W-BKA2</a> (describing the criminal
investigation into the streaming fraud scheme).
\50\ Smith Indictment at 15-17.
\51\ In this case, the hundreds of thousands of songs that the
defendant uploaded were created with artificial intelligence
(``AI''). Id. at 10-11. As the Congressional Request noted, ``there
is nothing inherently wrong with using AI as a creative tool in
music development, or the organic growth of AI-generated music,''
but there are concerns that ``generative AI can serve as a catalyst
for criminals to perpetrate streaming fraud[,]'' especially as
streaming fraud scales relative to the number of songs involved in
the scheme. Congressional Request at 2; Smith Indictment at 9 (``To
successfully execute the streaming fraud scheme . . . the defendant[
] needed access to a large volume of songs. Although [the defendant]
was himself a musician and had access to a small catalog of music
that he owned, . . . [the defendant] needed to own far more songs
for his scheme to generate meaningful illicit proceeds.'').
\52\ Smith Indictment at 5, 12; DOJ, Press Release, Statement on
North Carolina Man Pleads Guilty To Music Streaming Fraud Aided By
Artificial Intelligence (Mar. 19, 2026), <a href="https://perma.cc/WPB3-TSCS">https://perma.cc/WPB3-TSCS</a>.
In March 2026, the defendant pleaded guilty to one count of
conspiracy to commit wire fraud, and sentencing is scheduled for
October 2026. DOJ Press Release; Order Setting Sentencing for 10/6/
2026 at 3:00 p.m. Before Judge John G. Koeltl, No. 24-cr-504
(S.D.N.Y. June 10, 2026).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Outside of the United States, a Danish man was recently sentenced
to prison and fined for artificially inflating stream counts.\53\ An
alarming report out of Sweden found that ``crime networks linked to
drugs, fraud, and contract killings have for years used . . . false
streams of songs published by artists with ties to the gangs,'' to
``effectively launder[ ] the [gang's] money.'' \54\ And there appear to
be growing concerns that organized crime will use streaming fraud for
money-laundering and other nefarious purposes.\55\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\53\ See Mandy Dalugdug, Court Increases Prison Sentence for
Danish Man Convicted of Streaming Fraud, Music Bus. Worldwide (Feb.
10, 2025), <a href="https://perma.cc/GS2U-NLWR">https://perma.cc/GS2U-NLWR</a> (``The scheme involved
releasing edited versions of music copied from Danish musicians
under his own name'' and resulted in a criminal conviction for data
fraud and copyright infringement leading to a prison sentence and
restitution exceeding $45,000 USD.).
\54\ See Ashley King, Swedish Investigatory Report Reveals
Spotify as Money-Laundering `ATM for Criminal Gangs,' Digi. Music
News (Sep. 6, 2023), <a href="https://perma.cc/5A3N-3QH2">https://perma.cc/5A3N-3QH2</a>.
\55\ See NMPA Inks Deals With Udio & KLAY, Marking First
Industry-Wide Licensing Pacts With Major AI Music Firms, NMPA (June
10, 2026), <a href="https://perma.cc/2JQV-Z7V3">https://perma.cc/2JQV-Z7V3</a> (``There is growing concern by
the U.S. government that [streaming fraud] is being used to launder
money for organized crime and even to finance terrorism. Streaming
fraud is a national security issue.'') (statement of David
Israelite, President and CEO, NMPA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Congressional Request and Subjects of Inquiry
The Congressional Request asked for information on ``the prevalence
of streaming fraud across digital platforms and how it may be affecting
the music industry as a whole.'' \56\ To aid Congress's understanding
of these issues, the Office is soliciting written responses on the
subjects of inquiry below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\56\ Congressional Request at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. How is streaming fraud executed? What data is available about
the prevalence of specific schemes (e.g., bot farms, click farms,
playlist manipulation, and fraudulent marketing companies)?
2. What industry policies or practices may be inadvertently
contributing to streaming fraud?
3. What data is available on the current and projected economic
impacts of streaming fraud?
4. What data is available on the relationship of streaming fraud to
``the effects of AI-generated [music]'' and ``the licensing and
distribution . . . royalties'' for the performance and
[[Page 64192]]
reproduction of musical works and sound recordings? \57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\57\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. What data is available on the relationship of streaming fraud to
various aspects of live music performances, including venue selection,
ticket sales, or ``secondary sales (e.g., food and beverage,
merchandise, parking, etc.)?'' \58\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\58\ Id. at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. What methods have been used by various stakeholders to combat
streaming fraud and how effective have those methods been? Commenters
may wish to address:
a. How various stakeholders are differently positioned to prevent
fraudulent activity or investigate suspicious behavior;
b. The effectiveness of policies regarding trusted distributors,
content verification, customer verification, royalty clawback, fines,
and content removal; and
c. How stakeholders are using vendors to combat streaming fraud.
7. How can ownership or usage data be employed to better combat
streaming fraud? Commenters may wish to address:
a. Sharing of suspicious activity reports or other efforts to
increase transparency;
b. A shared database to track instances of known streaming fraud;
c. Metadata standardization and use; or
d. Labeling of content that is ineligible for statutory royalties.
8. What are some potential voluntary, statutory, or regulatory
solutions to streaming fraud? Commenters may wish to address:
a. Any voluntary initiatives or best practices that are currently
being considered;
b. Whether legislation providing for a remedy such as no-fault
injunctive relief \59\ could be used to address streaming fraud; and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\59\ See, e.g., Block Bad Electronic Art and Recording
Distributors Act of 2025, 119th Cong. (2025) (discussion draft),
<a href="https://perma.cc/MV3W-YW2V">https://perma.cc/MV3W-YW2V</a>; American Copyright Protection Act of
2026, H.R.10364, 119th Cong. (2026), <a href="https://perma.cc/8EBM-66HQ">https://perma.cc/8EBM-66HQ</a>;
Deterring Extraterritorial Foreign Exploitation of Networks Damaging
Intellectual Property (DEFEND IP) Act, H.R.10575, 119th Cong.
(2026), <a href="https://perma.cc/8JNV-NUUS">https://perma.cc/8JNV-NUUS</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. How rules governing information-sharing could be adjusted to
better combat streaming fraud.\60\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\60\ The U.S. Department of the Treasury's (``Treasury'')
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (``FinCEN'') recently issued a
Fact Sheet encouraging collaborative efforts between financial
agencies including the sharing of suspicious activity reports. See
generally, Section 314(b) Fact Sheet, FinCEN (June 12, 2026),
<a href="https://perma.cc/R49A-2UFD">https://perma.cc/R49A-2UFD</a> (discussing Treasury's steps to increase
information sharing between financial institutions to curb crimes,
including money laundering and fraud, and explaining when and how
the information can be shared through a statutory safe harbor).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. How can streaming fraud be better addressed through criminal
enforcement? Commenters may wish to address:
a. Effective approaches to pursuing criminal prosecutions related
to streaming fraud, including at the state and local level; and
b. Uses of streaming fraud by organized crime.
10. Any additional recommendations for Congress to address issues
related to streaming fraud.
Dated: October 5, 2026.
Emily L. Chapuis,
General Counsel and Associate Register of Copyrights.
[FR Doc. 2026-20537 Filed 10-6-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1410-30-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on October 7, 2026.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.