TorrentFreak

The place where breaking news, BitTorrent and copyright collide

Lady Gaga Earns Slightly More From Spotify Than Piracy

Piracy is without a doubt, truly evil. It doesn’t help the artists, it robs them of their rightful revenue and is such a poor basis for a business model, it’s unworthy of consideration. Of course, new streaming sites are miles better, offering a legal way to listen to free music. Hmm – Lady Gaga got a million plays on Spotify and earned $167.

gagaIn August, Swedish artist and composer Magnus Uggla launched a scathing attack on the owners of Spotify. After discovering that Sony BMG is a shareholder and receiving virtually no cash from his music being played there, he withdrew his tracks from the service and stormed away, declaring controversially: “I’d rather be raped by The Pirate Bay.”

Nevertheless, Uggla insisted that Spotify is a fantastic service with a great range of music to sample. However, he felt that the fact he wasn’t getting paid was the fault of the major labels involved in the project (Sony BMG bought 5.8% of Spotify for 2,935 Euros, Universal Music got 4.8% for 2,446 euros, Warner Music paid 1,957 Euros for 3.8% and EMI pocketed 1.9% for an investment of 980 Euros), claiming that he “earned as much in six months as a BUSKER could earn in a day.”

As the dust settled on the story, many non-Swedish readers were saying “Magnus who?” and wondering if this artist’s lack of mainstream popularity was the real reason behind him earning virtually nothing. But what about big artists? What about really, really big artists with huge international appeal. Say, an artist like Lady Gaga, who has sold more than 4 million albums and shifted in excess of 20 million paid digital downloads?

According to a report today, Lady Gaga’s track “Poker Face” was one of the most popular tracks during a five month period on Spotify and was played more than a million times. So how much money does she get paid by STIM (the Swedish Performing Rights Society) for this massive achievement?

SEK 1150 – that’s around $167 or roughly 113 Euros.

Commenting on the story, Douglas Léon, better known as Swedish rapper Dogge Doggelito, said he was dismayed.

“It is totally sick. We musicians have no rights, you may not charge [for music] anymore,” adding that Lady Gaga could’ve earned more driving an illegal taxi-cab.

Swedish artist, music producer and philosopher Alexander Bard, however, said that this payment was better than Lady Gaga would have achieved from her music being available via The Pirate Bay, noting that the amount was “…more than zero.”

Technically Bard is absolutely right, but let’s be honest – Lady Gaga would blow the money she earned from STIM in a 20 minute hotel mini-bar bender. Looking at the overall downloads, let’s face it, per track she earned pretty much near to nothing from both services.

While Spotify is to be commended for having the guts to try something new, for providing a truly wonderful service and for having achieved such a lot technically in a such a short space of time, one can’t help but wonder if it is ever going to bring in decent money for the artists.

After all, aren’t these the very people the music industry continually holds up as the important ones to encourage, nurture and support?

Lady Gaga’s example shows that Spotify’s business model needs some work, and the labels seem to agree on this. The US launch of the service has been delayed earlier this week, allegedly because of concerns about Spotify’s ability to upgrade free users to paid customers.

“We think Spotify is a great service but they’re going to have to convince us they can convert enough people from free to paid subscriptions to make it worth our while,” one label told the Financial Times. “As an ad-supported service the economics don’t work at all.”

Despite the startup troubles for Spotify the reviews from users, many of which were avid file-sharers, are still extremely positive. The service recently launched an iPhone app that allows users to play the tracks on the go, with or without an Internet connection, which many saw as the missing link. Now all they have to do is come up with a plan to actually make money.

Related Posts

Previous Post | Next Post

  • ha ha ha

    $167 more than through theft, sorry *$haring* LOL #1

  • cosy

    if lady gaga put a cd on TPB whit a donate link will get more money

  • Anonymous

    Shee maaad??

  • Anonymous

    So who is getting all the money?

  • malavel

    Magnus Uggla has sold 3 million records in Sweden.

  • Neil

    Lady Ga Ga should have to pay $167 to all the people who had to listen to her awful song on the radio for ages

  • Zein Zhnak Zou

    WRONG “piracy” is not bad provided its not commercial. reasoned-neo-beak.z shall soon descend on this comment page to post their lies.

  • bo

    i’m amazed by the fact that people even listen to music from artists such as lady gaga?

  • Em

    Downloads are limited to 4 out of the 6 countries that the service is available in.

    From what I read in the article, they counted the number of plays, and not downloads!

    No offense… but yeah… for listening once to a song you can’t pretend to cash-in more than that !!!

  • fuck ‘em

    That won’t even cover the cotton swabs used in her sex-change operation

  • Em

    Maybe I didn’t understood the service operation right… playing a song gets the artists cash from the tiny subscription fee of 10eu per month that a member has to pay but if someone wants to download a song, he/she will have to digg deeper into the pockets to buy it. Or not?

    So Uggla, what’s worng with it again?

  • Me

    You know what? For a site such as Spotify, who I am sure would use advertising, a site with as much traffic as they receive would without a doubt use advertising on site. One single advertisment would easily pick up between 4$ – 10$ CPM (cost per thousand impressions) Based on the fact that most pages on the internet have a minimum of 3 ads per page, that would mean that per million listens, if the listener only listened to one track or more, the minumum earnings per 1 million listens would be in the range of 10k$ and above.

    Another sad story of the labels AGAIN ripping the artist off, but blaming File Sharing in order to hide their own crimes against these artists.

    What a fucking sad day. I mean, I cant stand Lady Gaga, maybe her lack of funds comes from the fact that she, like all other fake ass pop stars, relies on others to write her music for her, meaning she loses a massive portion of her royalties, but either way, she should be entitled to just a little bit more than that.

  • Cynthia

    So Lady Gaga, currently on the UK Top 40 and probably many other charts, gets 0.000167 dollar per listen on Spotify?

    That’s… wow.

    One part of me wants to say “well, at least that’s not nothing, and Spotify is new at this” – and the other wants to say “what’s the point of listing your song on Spotify? jeez!”

  • pavel_at_bitsnoop_com

    (Eric Cartman’s voice)

    “Pah-pah-pah-pah-poker face!

    No one cares about your Gaga so go and hug a tree!”

    I’d like to have a compensation from Lady Gaga for my ruined faith in humanity after being exposed to her mooziq.

  • Tor-Arne

    How much does she get for having one song played once on a commercial radio station with a million listeners? Not much.

    I can assure you that Spotify pays much more than commercial radio.

    The big problem here is that most artists don’t understand streaming and compare it to mp3-sales.

  • Lady Caca blows goats

    Dreadful pop crap, but this is insane and typical of the REAL pirates … those thieves from the recording industry who keep 99.9% of what the actual artists should be earning.

    Interestingly enough, RIAAsoned Mind doesn’t seem to have a problem with this. Fu*king criminals … STOP ROBBING THE ARTISTS, YOU CORPORATE GANGSTERS!!!

  • gappi

    It’s easy to conclude that TPB and Spotify don’t bring in extra money for artists, but what about the users who bought Gaga’s album after finding it through one of these sites? Surely there must be some. It would be interesting to have some numbers on that as well to see how much the actual profit is.

  • Widget

    Piracy is indeed bad for pop artists. It lets people listen to the songs ahead of time and realize they they’re total crap and not worth buying =)

  • Reasoned Mind

    The layer of advertising needed to generate a streaming cashflow comparable to MP3 sales would be unlistenable. There’d have to be 57 minutes of ads to wade through to get to each three minute stream. Some consumers just won’t pay and so now the rest of us are burdened with their advertising. That’s how the internet works.

  • Huh?

    Who’s lady gaga?

  • emigrant

    You know what?

    I am going to learn Ubuntu.

    Peace.

  • capitanqueso

    musicians, get a job!!! work for 3 hours a day and want charge people all life for having to ear them? and each time?

  • Jasper100
  • Tigger

    I think comments #4 #16 & #17 made all the points i was wondering about =)

    Would be interesting if figures were available for peeps who bought the album after hearing first on Spotify.

  • Anonymous

    i would say that the problem with spotify is that it costs too much for the service it provides. £10 a month for music is not what i want to pay when not everything i want is on there. i get a better selection from the radio. although i will say that spotify is still an excellent idea which i use occasionally, but not enough to warrant them taking my cash

  • bittorrent forever

    What you can expect from Spotify when her songs and MTVs are available on YouTube?

  • Damien

    Spotify is just a huge scam for artists :D

  • Chuckjones

    It’s important to support art, if we want art. I’ve seen videos on Youtube of many artists, and if I like like it (Lady Gaga, Keri Hilson, Nora Jones, Wale, Beyonce) I go and buy it for a few bucks on itunes. It’s a “thank you” as much as anything. It’s not expensive to support artists. They give me more than they get in return. Lady Gaga’s new 8 track album is about $9. If you like her, as I do, buy it.

  • mister_playboy

    @ Reasoned Mind

    No one is obliged to support failed business models. These people should have learned from the dot-com bomb. Instead they repeated the mantra of that time:

    “We lose money on every transaction, but we’ll make it up with volume.”

    @ emigrant

    Welcome to freedom.

    @TF

    “You are posting comments too quickly. Slow down.

    I post once a week at best… why do I see this tripe? Please fix your system.

  • Anonymous

    IMO, artists shouldn’t look to things like Spotify as a money making thing, more of a promotional thing, which will help them get the publicity to make money in other ways.

    Plays should not be treated equally to buys, because it doesn’t replace buying. Most of the listens will be from people who would never consider buying it anyway, some will be from people who would never have considered buying it, but have after listening to it, and the rest from people who would have bought it, but have still bought it.

    I’d guess a very small amount will be from people who would have bought it, but have chose to not buy it and listen to it on Spotify instead. And these people will be more that cancelled out by the group who bought after listening.

    Any revenue generated from Spotify should be seen as an added extra, not the goal. The goal of being on Spotify should be to get publicity, not to earn cash. Just like playing songs on the radio :).

  • Rabbit80

    Time for some maths…

    Spotify pay £0.00085 per track per play in licensing. Lady Gaga gets £0.000101169 per play. (nearly 12%)

    The labels get £0.000748831 per play or £748.831 / $1,236.10 per million plays! (approx 88%) (Not counting profits from their shares in Spotify)

    Not as much as most people think (I admit I was surprised myself!) although the labels share is excessive!

    Of course – Spotify plays approx 24 million tracks per day…

    Source for Spotify Licensing fees: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2009/oct/08/spotify-internet

  • Rabbit80

    Actually – scrap my last post… After reading further it appears that is just the PRS cost re. licensing… There are other costs to factor in – money which goes directly to the labels!

  • Homer ate my doughnut

    WTF is Lady GAGA ????

    Is it a BDSM device?

  • 1201853

    Spotify is the new Radio. Radio paid really crap via publishing as well, for years and years. But they are promo machines for musicians.

  • Hurr

    I stopped downloading music after I got spotify, and after using it for a couple of months, I started paying for it. Still waiting for a windows mobile version though.

    Here’s an invite if someone wants..: dMq7nAyxxnHbcJPR

  • ralphie

    lol

    ‘Pray For the RIAA: Psalm 109:8?

  • /dev/null

    im surprised that 4 million plays of lady gaga is actually WORTH that much… tbh, her crap music isn’t even worth a cent

  • WSI

    IMO, Lady Gag Gag needs to find a different job. The only songs of hers i ever listen to are the ones remixed by reputable DJs. If i was forced to by an album…i’d rather buy Amy Winehouse and listen to her screaming emphysema over some wannabe prep who got her name from a Sting/Police song.

  • Chris Castiglione

    When building new technologies we should consider the benefit of the MUSICIAN before the MUSIC LABELS.

    I think the concept for Spotify is nice, but only if artists are being compensated fairly. That should be our priority because without musicians there is no record industry.

  • Username ENTER

    who use’s spotify anyways, its all about the pandora and last.fm

  • ProgulusFan

    Me and a few friends the other day went to a free show near where we live. It was a bunch of post rock bands, only 1 was really popular, the headline band. The headline band pulled out, but the other 3 bands stayed, and we went to the show anyway. It was an amazing show. One band offered a CD of 5-6 songs for a $1 donation and most of us donated some cash (Several of us gave about $5) to the band for being really cool and sticking around to talk with us after the show. I felt really good about myself after that. Much more than when I go out and buy a CD.

    I’m not promoting free concerts! I’m just putting out there, that if bands are good, and they aren’t completely in it for the cash, people respond. They asked for $1 donations for the CD. About 40 people were there (it was a small show at the local college radio station)and they left surprised with about $70 at a free show, and I intend to go to their next show in the area next month.

    ( http://www.myspace.com/fishingtheskyband )-Mandatory plug for the band

    Support the bands and not the labels :)

  • 36

    Lady Gaga is a good musician. She plays piano and creates her own music … she is different from the other mainstream pop artists. Although she might be a weird person in real life.

  • Anon

    @ProgulusFan

    Interesting band. Thanks for the link.

  • zcat

    “IMO, artists shouldn’t look to things like Spotify as a money making thing, more of a promotional thing, which will help them get the publicity to make money in other ways.”

    That’s exactly the point; for YEARS artists have been making SFA from record sales, CD sales, radio play, not even recouping the ‘cost’ (artificially inflated by the labels) of making an album, and the industry tells them it’s still OK because at least they’re getting their name out there. For everyone except the superstars, the CD is basically only advertising so they can start booking some gigs and make the real money.

    That’s why a good number of artists aren’t too worried about p2p, the only people who are are the labels, and artists that think they can’t survive without the labels.

  • dude

    Change all the “she”s in that article to “it” plz…

  • Mr Scared

    Oh wow, what a surprise.
    The musician has always been getting screwed by the recording studios and those kinds of companies.

    But yeah, it’s fine to give them a 160 bucks for 1 million views but if you share the mp3 on napster a few times you get hundred thousand dollar fines. MAKES SENSE!?!?

    browse safely. https://p-r-o-x-y.in

  • Anonymous

    Mr. Lady Gaga

  • Anonymous

    Piracy ROCKS!!!!

  • FNGghost

    Piracy ROCKS!!!

  • Liveforever

    @ Chuckjones,

    No thanks, I’ll just download the album for free, using software less shit than iTunes.

    I have the knowledge about bittorrent that approximately 1% of the internet using population has. The myth that filesharing is killing the record industry is nonsense.

    Having recently been employed by talktalk (an ISP)to head up a survey about peoples internet useage habits, over 99% didnt know what limewire was, even.

    Record companies are hell bent on insisting that everyone pirates music, but that couldnt be further from the truth, although, ironically, them making such a fuss about filesharing, is inadvertently going to make EVERYONE become a pirate.
    The RIAA and others are in fact, promoting bittorrent fantastically. Even if they whine that its stealing, they also mention that people can aquire music and films for FREE. Mention the word free, and everyone wants a piece.

    So basically, RIAA, just be quiet, and stop relentlessly promoting the thing you hate so much.

    I also dont remember noone coming on the news complaining that I tape recorded the top 40, and that was piracy as well, so I really dont get the difference.

    As 50 cent said, hes not bothered if anyone pirates his albums, as he stated (unlike most dumb artists)that he knows the ones who illegally download his music are never going to buy his album anyway, but if they like it enough, they might come to one of his concerts, thus giving him revenue anyway.

    But hes right, I own just about every music album ever made, and would of paid for any of them? Hell no, spending money on music and films is pretty much like paying for oxygen. Music became free with the birth of torrents.

  • Rasmus

    “Låt oss här göra ett snabbt överslag.

    Enligt STIMs senaste årsredovisning får upphovsmännen till en treminuterslåt som spelats 1 gång på 1 av riksradions kanaler 100 kronor att dela på. Spelas samma låt på lokalradion 1 gång får de 4 kronor att dela på.

    Säg att ett vanligt program på P1 har i snitt 50 000 lyssnare (sommar i P1 sägs ha en miljon lyssnare). Det innebär att en upphovsman får 0,002 öre betalt per lyssning.

    Säg att ett program i P4 har i snitt 5 000 lyssnare. Det innebär att upphovsmannen får 0,0008 kr betalt per lyssning.

    Hade det gått att göra en nyhet av det? Att Petter grät över att han efter att hans låt radiospelades bara fått “noll komma noll, noll, noll eller väldigt lite i alla fall”?

    Låt oss jämföra det med Spotify. I Almedalen i somras fick vi reda på att en upphovsman som hade fått sin låt uppspelad 150 000 gånger bara fick 500 kronor av Spotify. Eller ungefär vad en “halvdan gatumusiker får på en dag”, som Uggla uttryckte det.

    Men slå ut det per lyssning och du får 0,003. Alltså mer betalt än vad låten skulle fått om den spelades i P1.”

    http://www.dagen.se/blogg/emanuel/2009/08/mediernas-radsla-eller-spotify-betalar-battre-an-radio

  • A Clever Person

    “Piracy is without a doubt, truly evil. It doesn’t help the artists…”

    **yawn** so easy to just make blanket statements without checking up on your facts, isn’t it?

    http://labs.timesonline.co.uk/blog/2009/11/12/do-music-artists-do-better-in-a-world-with-illegal-file-sharing/

  • Rameses Niblick the Third

    Ta Hurr!

  • roar

    @43, STOP PROMOTING YOUR HONEYPOT https://p-r-o-x-y.in/ taken from site:
    Please do not use this site for illegal activities. All connections are logged.

    are you a moron and can’t read? Your name is mr scared but should be mr. entrapment.

    Try http://www.startpage.com instead of your favorite honeypot mr scared.

    @2 – Thats just my thoughts exactly

  • ElvenRuneLord

    I find the comment about 57 minutes of advertising to pay for 3 minutes of music to be amusing.

    If that is the case then someone has no idea just how much adverting should cost.

    With the decline of the costs of advertising, we are going to see way to may big dick bob and sex sadie’s penis pills with supersized sides of foreign pharmacies.

    Start charging what your advertising is worth and you will find a viable business model.

    Trust me, if the companies want to waste our times with advertising bad enough, they will pay what you ask!

    Youtube videos, official and non-official have been responsible for 8 out of the last ten albums I purchased, mainly off of Amazon.com

    I imagine if I was using spotfy and the same services were available then I might have done the same there.

  • zeebart

    @ 38:

    EXACTLY :)

  • A More Clever Person

    @A Clever Person
    As you are unfamiliar with sarcasm, perhaps you should read that whole title again! Hmm…

    @roar
    Troll tactics! (I looked it up)

  • A More Clever Person

    Also Mr. Honeypot/Scared

    According to Firefox page info…
    “This web site does not supply ownership information.”

    Rather fishy for a privacy site!

  • A More Clever Person

    @roar
    Thanks for the NON honeypot link.

  • The end Result

    You know, the more you ‘fight’ the industry, the more they wanna take a chunk out ya ass. Eventually, THE INTERNET WILL BE BANNED.

    It’s only a matter of time..

  • ultraleetj

    “musicians, get a job!!! work for 3 hours a day and want charge people all life for having to ear them? and each time?” We musicians indeed have no rights. We do get a job, and that job is payed, per session, if we’re working for someone that wants to do a cover (I.E. we’re doing tracks for a singer) . But.. the production and all of those expenses are cut off by the industry. The industry allows people some money for studio costs, generating cds, ETC ETC, but then you’re expected to pay it gradually “as time goes by” (no references to that song!) and of course … they try to “recover” what they had given you by letting you earn rather little on the cds they sell. It used to be like that before. People were making good money before… the industry or the smaller record labels put a lot of their effort in and they are a good way of promotion for someone that is starting out. However, thanks to the software that makes home recording studios possible … the industry is loosing out. Because this software is so good that in styles like latin music it ca create horrible, quantised, mechanical piano montunos… musicians have lost our jobs as studio musicians. We have no rights because we’re being used as the “cash cows” for the industry. I woudl charge people for listening to my music only once, say with the sale of a cd. Downloads are free though, and even the music sheet is included with them! But i wouldn’t charge “listening royalties” for people to hear. I’d charge if say, people would wanna use my compositional works for something they are working on, but for listening … nuh uh… just when someone buys the cd, and thas it. The major music labels show each day they got less and less experience doing what they are doing… and less proffessionalism as well.

  • where do i pay

    Lady who ???

    Dear Mr. Producers.

    I recently downloaded “Inglorious Basterds”, I liked the movie and would like to pay you directly, is there a donate button anywhere which I can use to contribute to your efforts.

    Many Thanks

    Try Before I Buy.

  • chisophugis

    “As an ad-supported service the economics don’t work at all.”

    Have you heard of Google? Look up their yearly profits and assets and you’ll shit yourself when you realize that that is basically ALL from advertising.

  • Turbis

    Well it’s still more than what she earns for it if it’s played on swedish radio.

  • foodlfg

    “Spotify is not available in my coutry”
    Torrent is better.

  • Adam

    STIM is only one part (the small part) of what an artist would get from Spotify. They have to pay both the publishing rights society (which is STIM or PRS) and the label.

    So find out how much the label got for those listens before you attack.

  • hmmm

    @62
    As soon as a new good – non commercially biased in its results – search engine will appear, Google will fall so fast you won’t even realize it.

    That’s what happened to altavista ten years ago.

  • Turbis

    @66
    Google is practically ad-free. They make money selling ads to other sites that need funding.

  • Tub Brumber

    Poor @51 doesn’t understand sarcasm

  • gaga is a stoopid whore

    @15

    so true dude, have you seen the contracts muscians have to sign, they get ass raped all the way! the recording industry takes ownership of everything…fuking bastards!

  • Pingback: Lady Gaga Earns Slightly More From Spotify Than Piracy | TorrentFreak — Shopping Online by lakyo

  • Soundwave (Have A Cigar)

    Selling music works, the problem is, they overcharged us since the beginning.

    Even rich people are like WTF, this shit is expensive. Well, what do you think poor people will do, just not get “the privilege” of listening to music?

    What a legacy, you son of bitch slippery barracuda bastards. ..

    Today, with digital music, the quality went down, the DRM went up, physical product got dropped, shipping no longer need, yet the price stayed the same!

    Congratulations, you $1000 dollar suit wearing clumps of burning excrement, you’ve earned these problems.

    It’s only a matter of time before the underground record labels free your hostage musicians and take back the music. There’s no way back; bide your time.

  • Soundwave (Have A Cigar)

    Also, I’m drunk, so you know I speak the truth.

  • Anonymous

    @69 the first contract you get is called a dummy contract cos only dummy’s singe it.

    Spotify is a con for artists.

    did you see her new video she looks super sexy with her hypnotic eyes.

    GAGA is sexy sure she maybe average but still nice.

    The only thing she needs really is put on a few pounds man she’s like a stick.

  • Nick

    To clarify – is this 1 million downloads in Sweden or globally? I is the STIM just paying her $167 for a proportion of the 1 million in Sweden?

  • Charles Frith

    You’ve completely missed the point which is best articulated that you not the artist are moaning about Spotify.

  • Pingback: News roundup 22/11/09 « OPEN BYTES – cave quid dicis, quando, et cui.

  • Krok

    Alexander Bard is everything but a philosopher!

  • Em

    @72, it’s 1 mil. PLAYS in their online player, not downloads… kinda like the number of views of a YouTube movie, and globally doesn’t exist if we talk about Spotify ’cause the service is only available in a handful of countries.

  • Anonymous

    This is why the record labels need to fucking die, and why anything that can hasten their demise is justified.

    They call filesharers “thieves” for a transaction where nothing is stolen, they condemn us for being hypothetical purveyors of lost sales, but they’re the real thieves.

    The labels. Them. They sit there and steal money from the artists, real money, not the hypothetical kind. Real money that would otherwise be given to them if it weren’t being scooped up by those parasites, real money that has been rightfully earned but wrongfully given to greedy old men in suits who didn’t peform a single note or write a single lyric of the music they tax.

    They like to pretend that we only fileshare because we can get something for nothing, but things like this – $167 for 1,000,000 plays – are the reason why so many of us have unplugged ourselves from the content industry’s apparatus never to return, no matter what carrot they dangle infront of us and no matter what they threaten us with.

    It’s an ideological thing.

  • these “artists” still don’t get it

    even though they don’t get the money from every track play they get they get ADVERTISED- and that’s what’s important

    if i like an album that i got either off pirate bay or heard it on spotify i buy it. i go to the artist’s live performances, i buy the cd for my friends on their birthdays, etc

    jesus christ, when are they gonna all get it

  • Gareth

    I don’t think this has been touched upon, but I tend to use spotify to listen to music that I have already purchased on CD. It’s more convenient for me as I do not have to rip the CD contents to my HD to play.

    It’s just the same as listening to the same music on the radio, the only difference is that I decide on the the play list.

    The artists and record companies have gained by the advertising revenue generated and not lost one penny. So what is there to moan at?

    @Reasoned Mind – How many commercial radio staitions who’s main output is music based can name that have an hourly output of 57 minutes of advertising each and every hour? None I guess as it would be commercial suicide as they would not have any listeners.

  • Ehm

    @32 roflmao that made my day

  • Pingback: 1 million views on Spotify earns Lady Gaga $167

  • Tim

    Now I don’t think Spotify has its business model quite right, but a million plays is hardly any to be honest.

    If you paid for a single from iTunes, how many times do you think a person will play that track over their entire lives as with an iTunes or CD purchase you pay once and then can play the song as often as you like? Lady Gaga’s music will probably not stand up to time very well, but shall we say 50 times?

    If Lady Gaga personally makes $0.05 per track sold on iTunes, then to get to $167 she would need to sell 3340 singles. If those 3340 singles are played 50 times each by their purchaser, that would be 167,000 plays.

    Yes, that means that she would make 6 times more with iTunes/CD sales, but that is hardly the huge difference she was talking about. Also, if you make song that do last through time and become classics you still make money per play forever from each user, whilst with single sales you only make money from each user once.

  • Gavin

    They have to remember that this services will encourage people to purchase songs as well.

    It’s a bit like the radio, you hear a song and if you like it anuff you buy it. (Ovusaly some will pirate it.)

    I’m shore that artist don’t make much more money from the radio, per person that hears the song.

  • Anonymous

    The solution!

    Kill radio and streaming services.

    They should implement 3 strikes for radio listeners who don’t buy anything too LoL

    People who watch TV for free should be jailed those criminals LoL

    ps: This is a rant and is intended as sarcams.

  • tpp

    This article doesn’t mention how much did Spotify pay out in total for that track.

    The traditional music industry “business model” would’ve had Spotify pay out $10K.

  • tpp

    The original article says the total pay out was double that (2300 Swedish Krona or $334).

    Wow, that’s seriously f***ed up. The shareholders must love the service. Artists…not so much.

  • KsbjA

    @ number 6 – I second that, but tastes differ.

  • Dustin Wirght

    Wow, good for Lady Guy Guy! Imagine that. LOL

    Harry
    ultimate-privacy.br.tc

  • mr.johnjones [wormhole] gmail.com

    Woah woah woah, this is plays – not downloads?

    I pay £10 for Now2009 or whatever, i listen to the album 100 times, and there’s 24 songs on the album.

    So from the £10 i spent, i pay £0.00417 for each of the 2400 plays.

    How much of this money goes to the artists?

    Around 10% of the Royalty Base Price of an album goes to the artist (although, this can be higher if they’re a well-established artist who has more room to negotiate. When Lady Gaga sold her rights for this first album, she wouldn’t have gotten more than 12%)
    The Royalty Base Price is usually less than 75% of the retail price or the CD.

    So, at 75% of the retail price, the Royalty Base Price is around £7.50.
    Of that, an artist will usually receive 10%, making around £0.75 per album sold.
    [http://www.funtrivia.com/askft/Question70079.html]

    That’s 0.0003125 per play.
    Spotify offer 0.000167 per play.

    I seriously doubt she cares that she is only getting half of what she would have gotten from her CD sales.

    Spotify is selling Ice to Inuits. ie, music to internet-savvy consumers.

    She should be happy to receive 1% of what she makes from CD sales, let alone %50!

    Not to mention, as people have said earlier, you can buy the CD AND a Spotify account.

    People seem to forget two big things about the music industry:

    1) Only a tiny fraction of an artist’s earning come from selling the album. Most comes from gigs/tours/paraphernalia.

    2) Only a tiny fraction of people want an artist’s gigs/tours/paraphernalia.

    Yet they still earn more than i’ll make for winning a Nobel prize three times in a row!

    Lady GaGa doesn’t care about Spotify, and she doesn’t care about The Pirate Bay. For her, it’s just the masses scrambling to get her cheapest commodity.

    For the labels it’s just another market yet to be exploited.

    For pirates/anti-pirates/Neo-Styles/Reasoned-Mind/Torrentfreak/you/me, it’s all people talk about.

    ”Oh noes, Lady GaGa is making less than a Busker off Spotify”

    - and she’s still earning more than you, all because she made a song which repeats the first syllable of a word 8 times.

  • Jim

    Lady Gaga is one of the few artists who has a platinum album right now. Granted it would have went probably 7 or 8 times platinum had this been 1999. She shouldn’t be complaining, the bitch has had like 5 number one hits.

    A place for up to date movie leaks sent straight to your phone via twitter!

    http://www.twitter.com/movieleak

  • Zush

    “she made a song which repeats the first syllable of a word 8 times.”

    That why we shouldn’t even give £1.67 for such a “song”.

  • superchicken

    I think people miss the point. Spotify is supposed to be more of a marketing arm for Lady Gaga than actual cash machine. How many CDs is she selling because she is on Spotify in the first place?

    Perhaps a better question is asking seriously why those 1 million listeners don’t have something better to do with themselves than subject their ears and time to Lady Gaga.

  • Alex

    @Bo – #8: “i’m amazed by the fact that people even listen to music from artists such as lady gaga?”

    I am amazed by the fact that there are people who don’t!

  • filevortex

    @11 I think you hit the nail on the head here, most of the income from this site goes to the shareholders as an ‘overhead’ (their revenues are guaranteed, its the artist that needs to hope there is enough left over after the carrion feeders are done that there will be a snack for them)

    what really needs to be done here is a concerted effort, a PUBLIC one, that does not rely on needing huge corporate investors to pull it off, if torrent sites can make a living through donations to cover their server and bandwidth costs with maybe a bit of beer money for the admins at the end of the month for the considerably difficult job they do have, why cant THIS be done as a legitimate ‘open-source’ solution to the record industry, art is for our culture to grow, not to be hidden behind ever raising numbers of $$ signs that never end up seeing the artist no matter what path is taken, if the record labels are on that path at some point along the way. everyone who is into filesharing downloading these songs, and donating to their tracker, should really consider this move, if it has the support of the artists and the public at large….everyone is happy

    screw the record labels

  • Tomas

    In 2 weeks time I’m off to see a band that I would never have known about had it not been for LastFM/Spotify.

    Based on my Spotify plays, LastFM recommended this group to me. I listened on Spotify and instantly loved them. LastFM then told me they were playing here soon, so I got myself a ticket.

    That’s the real power of Spotify. Also this band has an album with 23 songs on. THAT is what you would know as someone who is making music for the love of music. Someone making a song with 8 tracks that someone else wrote and then whining about pirates is someone who makes music to get rich.

    Now don’t get me wrong, I’d love to be rich as well. At least I would be honest about that though.

    Just look at how all the popular artists start up their own record label. That’s because they are fed up of the big boys screwing them over. The record company is entirely set up on the basis that they produce the cd, sell it and keep most of the money. The artist performs gigs to earn their bread. With the advent of internet and torrents, suddenly cds are not needed any more, so the music labels go to war with pirates, because it completely removes the label from the equation. Artists can come directly to fans/consumers.

    I never paid a penny to listen to this band. I didn’t pirate their music either. LastFM recommended them, Spotify let me listen to them and I’m happy to pay to see them live. I’m happy to support them financially, because I would like to hear more from them in the future. I don’t really care about supporting Sony, Warner etc though.

  • A non mouse

    @superchicken
    I think you missed the point. It is a marketing arm and a cash machine for the ‘Label’ not Lady GagGag. They make money from CD sales not her. They are just pimpin her like any other hooker.

  • knux

    I agree, if she simply would ask for donation or do a pay what you like type deal, she would have broken way above the $167 mark, not to mention the several thousand dollar mark easily.

  • A non mouse

    @Tomas,
    You just summed up the entire problem and a solution in one statement. File sharers are NOT the problem, the unwilling to adapt labels ARE!

  • A non mouse

    The record labels have been crying about how much money they are losing for a long time. Check out this photo on Flickr of the ‘Dead Kennedys’ cassette ‘In God We Trust’ released in 1981.
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/24760522@N08/2466252899/

    The record labels back then were saying home recording was going to kill the business. Well, its what 18 years later, when are they going to die already?

  • A non mouse

    Doh! Make that 28 years later. Never was good at math!

  • Randomness

    I agree with comment #6, Lady Gaga should pay me 167$ for everytime I had to hear her awful Poke her ass, I mean face song

  • Pingback: How to Make a Shortwave Radio Antenna for Less Than $1.00 | Shortwave Ham Radio

  • Pingback: Why Music Is Broken – The Artist To Consumer Connection

  • Pingback: Lady Gaga earned $167 from 1 million plays via Spotify « Music Business Concepts

  • could b different

    Before mp3com was bought by some of the big companies they actually started a program, where they – without being asked/forced to do so – paid $1.000.000/month from their advertising income to the artists on the page, based on the hits each artist/band created individually.

    Their position was “we earn enough to share it with you, so here you go”.

    Did it work?

    Well, let me say it like this: I’m what I consider a “hobby musician” with my own homestudio and I had some moderate success there. Compared to a big hit on the radio that runs several times each day, my tunes were played like once a week, but they were played.

    For a while that was enough to earn *more* than Lady Gaga’s $160 in a smegging month.

    Nothing to get rich from, but it definitely helped me paying my rent for a while.

    A friend of mine who was actually in the top ten of electronic music (mind you, by far not the most popular genre) reached five-digit sums several times.

    Some of the *really* successful artists made “professionals” (as in “ppl with major contract deals”) like Madonna or Michael Jackson envious…

    This wasn’t just made up, it really worked, I sure got my money and talked with other artists who all got their earnings without any problems as well…

    For a little while, like half a year or so, it looked as if you really could earn your living from making music and giving it away for free without losing your rights of the material and with keeping complete creative control of your own material.

    Then mp3com was sold – to the “big ones” – and the very first thing that happened was they shut down the payback programme at *once*.

    Today I rather pay for my own server to provide my music for free without any adverts (they annoy me) than having it on one of the pages who actually pay you a little for it (which, I tried them, pay a few cents/month for my “publicity level” instead of actual money).

    My page has a “donate” button, but no ever used it yet – which is fine with me, I’m happy enough to see from my stats that people *do* listen to my music – that’s all that matters to me.

    I gladly *pay* to keep my music online for free instead of helping those bigshot company parasites fill their pockets even more. I had one or two direct experiences with actual labels and how they treat musicians and the whole mp3com story was the last straw for me – I say “Nevermore!”.

    Each day the big player parasites survive is one day too many.

    Regards – Michael Briel
    leave a comment @ http://brielmusik.de/node/819

  • Me

    Even if I were a multimillionaire, I wouldn’t pay a single dollar for such crappy music.

  • Adam

    Wonder what she gets from YouTube for 87 million listens?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M65zI9LH-as

  • A non mouse

    @Michael/could b better
    I remember mp3com, I got a lot of great music there in the early days of the interweb. If more artists like you banded together (pun unintentional), saying this to the media, get your 10 minutes on ’60 Minutes’ and let the rest of the world now just how awful the record labels are, we could put an end to all this tyranny of the media moguls. Just my two cents.

    Checking out you site now.

  • ART THEFT

    Piracy is a theft and a direct violation to teh efforts of Artists.
    Such as:
    THE LARGEST ART THEFT IN HISTORY, PERVERSE WITH THE KIDNAPING OF TEH ARTIST SON AND MURDER OF HIS FATHER.
    The story at http://www.publicjustice.tv and http://www.kidnapped.tv

    Crime moves faster then Justice…

  • Anonymous

    I think the business model need to be reversed. It should be the record company paying the customer not the other way around. Cmon get a grip on reality these modern music is nothing but noise pollution. They are detrimental to your ears!

  • Steven finch

    This amount was only small because of the agreement with major labels. I’m 100% sure this amount is small because of the stake the majors have with spotify. We have an agreement with spotify and royalties are a lot more.

  • mirrormagic

    Seriously, who needs record labels?

  • TheShadowXX

    what a stupid b!tch, who cares about her, she has no talent, she can’t make music.

  • gorehound

    Being a musician I really wonder why any artist in their right mind would ever sign with any asshole corporate agency.I am now in my 50′s and still rockin out and i must say it is easy for you younger musicians to make it on your own.
    YOU HAVE THE NET !!!
    I still remember having to mail out hundreds of singles at the post office and albums too for reviews and promos.Now it is so easy to get some fans.
    If I were just strating out I would never sign with any of these shysters.Stop being lazy and put your own stuff out.

    And as far as MPAA,RIIAA, and Hollywood you will never get my money for new products.I buy no corporate krap music and for movies i will not buy new i buy only used so you will never get a dime out of me.

  • Abbernomad

    So let’s see. You can hear the song streamed (radio), but not pay for it? (radio) and they can’t make money? (dumbass internets) Follow the radio model. It’s worked for years. Free songs, shitty ads, happy douchbag artists.

  • Anonymous

    I’m glad Lady Gaga made almost nothing – maybe now she’ll shut her fucking untalented mouth.

  • Anonymous

    Don’t mess with Lady Goo Goo, She is one tough hombre. So tough she can pee standing up while smokin a turkey!

  • Dashing Leech

    This article is rife with linear thinking and loaded with assumptions.

    The opening line foreshadows the limited thinking, claiming “piracy” is truly evil and that artists don’t get anything from it. They get promotion. “Piracy” has been shown repeatedly to increase sales and live attendance. The dynamics between file sharing and paid access haven’t settled yet and won’t for awhile, but it is unfair to call it “evil”.

    The article then laughs at $167 for 1 million plays. But it fails to compare to other media. How much did it earn from radio? Most artists lose money directly on radio and clubs, yet they spend money on this type of promotion. (See, for instance, http://www.radio-media.com/song-album/articles/airplay50.html). If direct income is the measure, that would make radio even more evil than piracy.

    Even from CD sales the artists only get about 83 cents, or about 6-7 cents per song. If the purchaser plays that song 100 times, the artists doesn’t get another cent. The first million plays of Lady Gaga’s “Poker Face” by CD probably earned her only a few hundred dollars as well. (People often confuse CD sales with song plays, which aren’t the same.)

    The problem with the thinking is that it ignores that music income is a feedback system. Artists earn most of their money in live performances. They earn less if they don’t promote through radio and internet, even losing direct money in the process. And if they do manage to earn money from CD sales, after costs are accounted for, they sell more CDs by promoting their songs by … you guessed it … radio, clubs, and internet play.

    The article also makes bad analogies. Buskers and taxi driving only make money by doing more work. Lada Gaga and Magnus recorded their songs once. They didn’t have to lift a finger for the Spotify play. It’s more comparable to how much they’d earn if somebody else was driving a cab, which is nothing.

    Stop thinking so linearly.

  • 420

    Where do you get papers big enough to smoke a turkey?

  • Lady Caca

    @ 114 420

    I sell those. Call me: 1-800-POP-CRAP

  • 420

    (Feverishly dials phone number…beep beep beep! Damn its busy!)

  • STFU TF

    seems pretty hypocritical for a news site that advocates piracy to criticize a site that attempts to be legal and offer music cheaply when piracy offers zero revenue. I wonder how much money thepiratebay or mininova made for Lady Gaga? Oh yeah, zero………..

  • Anon

    It must be Monday, the trolls are back!

  • 420

    (Dials number again… beep beep beep! Damn it! Still busy!)

  • The Power of the Magic Poodle

    Spotify sounds like some service to render your clothes requiring a cleaning.

    As for Lady Gaga, well, I have a better nickname.

  • Neocreo

    Question: How much money does Lady Gaga get from her track being played on radio? Also, could an artist who thought he did not receive enough money pull his track from the radio as well? Also, is it Spotifys problem that the labels do not share their revenue with their artists?

    As for the conversion rate from free to paid subscribers, I am waiting for a native Linux version of the program if I am gonna pay for it.

  • IainK

    This is ludacris. What the hell do artists expect? Does a radio station pay out $167 in royalties per 1mil listeners hearing a track once? No chance. The artists don’t understand that these streaming services are not download services. They are radio.
    They are being paid royalties not cash from the purchase of a track.

  • realityBytes

    Without the bullsh*t marketing and hype… Lady Gaga would never have even elevated beyond the recognition of a busker.

    For the decrepid excuse of ‘art’ that has been produced by the industry… $167 profit is $167 too much!!

  • Pingback: Linkwertig: Apple, RealTime CrunchUp, Brizzly, Foursquare » netzwertig.com

  • Matt

    It’s also hard to have sympathy with these artists in general I find, when there are idiots and divas like j-lo and mariah carey who are paid ludicrous amounts of money which they do not deserve, and then treat other people like sh*t. And then there are all these famous rappers flashing millions of dollars of jewellery and cars. First get rid of those all those people from the industry, and then find a way to distribute the wealth more evenly between the artists and everyone involved in getting their music out. Also, like the commenter before points out, this is royalties, not a download service, it’s not spotifys fault.

  • jacicaalban

    what the hell is that about? lady gaga does not even deserve to shine David bowie s shoes. what the hell has she invented other then pop 80s sound of music .. which if im not mistaken has been done already through Gwen stefani’s albums. while David bowie invented styles like glam rock, new wave, blue-eyed soul….not to mention the countless other characters he created. Ziggy, Halloween jack, the thin white duke, etc…..
    back in the day artist had to earn their place in history and became legends for doing so. today its all whatever you want……not even art anymore

    so how the hell can you compare the two..?Colopure

    http://www.goarticles.com/cgi-bin/showa.cgi?C=2163865

  • Pingback: A Ga Ga approach to marketing? « The Naked Pheasant

  • The Spelling Nazi

    @61

    It’s p-a-i-d, not “payed”. And only one f in professionalism. Perhaps, instead of a day job, some remedial school courses are in order.

  • C

    Performing rights revenues are a distorted metric. If Lady Gaga wrote 5% of the song, then the song generated more revenue than is reported here. And the performing right only rewards the songwriting – it doesn’t look at the master/sound recording right, which usually generates significantly more money.

    Artists and songwriters are often different people. To say that the artist gets paid nothing because one song she may have written a small share of generated $167 is misleading, at best.

  • Pingback: Spotify und die Verdienstmöglichkeiten für Musiker | myoon

  • Pingback: Spotify pays Lady Gaga $167 for 1 million plays | Electricpig

  • Pingback: ? Lady Gaga ?????? ?? ???? ?? ??? ??? ?? Spotify | Search Top Greek Blog

  • Pingback: torrents vs spotify | deninho.gr

  • koningwoning

    I think some people don’t understand that Spotify is still not raking in cash.
    First: they are still losing money on streaming their content…. it’s only a matter of time before they “Last.Fm” their service: only paid subscriptions – meaning less streams and finally making money. But first they need the critical mass.
    Second: their number of advertisers is a lot lower than you think. The numbers people here are calling is ludicrous… especially as they do not know how Spotify does it’s ads: three or four times max per hour a radio spot in between streaming – or premium subscription of € 10 per month.

    They now have 34.000 paying users. So no… if you are not played – you are not paid.

    They also only very recently introduced the “Download song” option… so not a lot of people will be using that right now… give it some time.

    I am wondering how much Lady Gaga earned by a radio station of normal proportions per time played. Becaus eit´s as if she was payed on a big radio station here in NL about twice… getting € 167,- for that is not that bad…..

    Want to know more…. come join me @ http://www.ThedigitalHighC.com (going live tonight) or follow me on twitter: @koningwoning

  • Jesse Woods

    Wow, amazing, Is lady “guy guy” doing that well? I had absolutely no idea!

    Jess
    http://www.ultimate-privacy.br.tc

  • Pingback: Low payout for Gaga from Spotify « Spotify news and technology progress by Fredrik Kjell

  • AntiHero

    So the million dollar record deals and hundreds of thousands of dollars in concert revenues just can’t get these peoples pockets fat enough?

    I can’t even afford to eat 3 meals a day!

    167 bucks would feed that bitch mcdonalds for a week!

  • isoHunt

    @LadyGaga earns $167 from 1M Spotify plays, while Radiohead made $millions from pay-what-u-want but free DLs of In Rainbows. Gaga, I’m sure BT users will donate more to you than $167 if you torrent your songs yourself ;)

  • Pingback: Lesezeichen vom 23. November 2009 | PolkaRobot

  • jimmy crack

    “one can’t help but wonder if it is ever going to bring in decent money for the artists.”

    Nope, how can you expect the artist to get paid when the producers and record labels are involved, lol. Don’t blame the free people because the rich get richer at the expense of the artist.

  • Pingback: Spotify Isn’t Ripping Off Artists, The Labels Are - P2P Talk?

  • Pingback: Music Ally | Blog Archive » Spotify slaps down Lady Gaga royalties rumours

  • Pingback: HOW MUCH DO ARTISTS MAKE FROM SPOTIFY AND OTHER STREAMING SITES??

  • Pingback: SPOTIFY SLAPS DOWN ON LADY GAGA ROYALTIES RUMORS

  • Anon

    @Spelling Nazi

    Not everyone speaks/writes English as their primary language. You do understand how the interweb works, right? People from around the world of MANY languages can post on here. Perhaps a remedial social studies class is in order for you.

    Damn nazis always starting trouble!

  • Pingback: Spotify Isn’t Ripping Off Artists, The Labels Are | We R Pirates

  • Pingback: Thanks to Spotify Lady Gaga Can Buy a Keg! « The New Rockstar Philosophy

  • Pingback: Spotify Isn’t Ripping Off Artists, The Labels Are | InstantIdiocy

  • hellomeow

    “Piracy is without a doubt, truly evil.”

    Get this crap off TorrentFreak, plox.

  • GrossChecker

    You all missed the point entirely. Of course the play/download count numbers were made up by the industry. Nobody listens to that crap. As a matter of fact, only 10 people downloaded her album, that’s where the 113 Euro come in.
    Spotify claims one million plays in order to signal “Look, we’re such a popular site. Come and invest!”. The label claims one million plays in order to signal “Look, we got such popular artists. Come and buy!”
    Glad I could help.

  • Pingback: Brief von Rasch Rechtsanw?lte Hamburg - Teil 2 - Seite 143 - netzwelt.de Forum

  • Pingback: Would Lady Gaga rather be Pirated than Spotted?

  • Kosmo

    Larry Lessing, lawyer and a Standford professor is some what of an activist when it comes to copyright issues.

    On hes TED talk he covers the past and present of copyrights and it seems they have never been without a controversy. 1906 a debate was held whether the gramophones were arts and music or not.

    Interesting talk and gives some perspective on how ludicrous some of the stiffer laws on digital content are and how a middle ground should be found.

    http://www.ted.com/talks/larry_lessig_says_the_law_is_strangling_creativity.html

  • Pingback: Musicians—Money Is Not Motivation

  • Anonymous

    just sick of seeing this caca everywhere…

  • Daddy GooGoo

    @139 Anonymous
    Would that be lady caca your tired of seeing everywhere?

  • Pingback: Musik 2.0: Lady Gaga, Lily Allen und die Generation Kostenlos | Basic Thinking Blog

  • your mom

    It makes no sense that someone who works for a file sharing news website would be so anti ones own consumer base.

  • glr

    I must ask though, how much money does an artist get for every played song on the radio?

  • Lady Ga ga ga ga

    She’s a crazy ass bitch who is hot as hell and I would!

  • Pingback: Spotify Isn’t Ripping Off Artists, The Labels Are @ blog.idtorrent.org

  • ttt

    http://electronlibre.info/Polemique-sur-ce-que-Spotify,00524 (French).

    According to this site, she would have earned more than just $167. Sorry if it had already been pointed out.

  • Emily

    Sorry if this has been said before.

    The whole point is not to know if Lady Gaga makes good or bad music and if she deserves the money. She’s used to get your attention because no one would read this if Swell Season wasnt getting paid enough. Spotify is definately not working right now because it is barely better than illegal download, the artists should get paid for the music they make and the record labels shouldnt put their artists on this kind of website because it makes it legit and leads the people who download the song to believe that they arent doing something bad for the music industry.

  • Pingback: ¿Cuánto gana Lady Gaga con Spotify? | Música Online 2.0

  • Caldoran

    To the absolute idiots here taking low-blows about how her music is “lousy” or that she “can’t sing”, or otherwise something with a similar effect, such as “I’m surprised people even listen to her”, watch THIS:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWW6xLDbi3c
    I dare you to. Then the next dare?
    Repeat whatever it is you said.
    Morons.

  • Pingback: His Master Voice* « La opción b

  • BTGuard - BitTorrent Anonymously

NewsBits

Even more news...

  • The Pirate Bay Isn’t Down Completely, Just Having a Few Issues

    Twitter and Facebook, not to mention the TorrentFreak inbox, are currently alive with complaints that The...

  • Pirate Bay Founder Gottfrid Svartholm on Freedom of Speech

    Freedom of speech is a highly valued commodity, but should people be allowed to say whatever...

  • Blu-ray Anti-Piracy Tech Stops Discs and Promotes Purchases

    An anti-piracy system present in all official Blu-ray players since 2012 has received a fresh update...

  • Foxtel Breeds Pirates by Locking Up Game of Thrones

    One of the main reasons why people turn to piracy is the lack of legal alternatives....

  • UK Student Admits Breaching Sony Copyrights With Leak of PS3 SDK

    Last year an Internet user known as El Nomeo leaked version 3.70 of Sony’s Playstation3 SDK...

MostDiscussed

Below are TorrentFreak's most discussed articles of the past month. Join the discussion if you like.

CopyQuote

Left Quote

“The Pirate Bay has been one of the most important movements in Sweden for freedom of speech, working against corruption and censorship.

Peter Sunde Left Quote

PopularArticles

A selection of some TorrentFreak's classics dug up from our archives.