Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Last.fm Strongly Denies Sharing Data With RIAA

Posted by kdawson on from the he-said-she-said dept.

bonch writes "Last.fm and CBS vehemently deny sharing any user data with the RIAA, contrary to previous reports. One anonymous party calls it 'irresponsible journalism,' and Last.fm goes so far as to suggest it is a target of slander. Carla Duckworth of the RIAA confirmed, 'We've made no such request for this information.'"

122 comments

  1. RIAA also says by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Thanks for the good idea!"

    1. Re:RIAA also says by sopssa · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'm actually siding with Last.FM here, just for the reason that TechCrunch deleted mine and many others comments if it was about *anything* against their view or if you defended last.fm. The most recent article about last.fm downtime was also hilarious try to make bad comments about them (and see the writers comments in that article :). Now, I do not know anything about which side is valid. But by far last.fm has answered questions and what they have been accused of, while TechCrunch keeps removing comments that dont side with them. For me that says something.

    2. Re:RIAA also says by sopssa · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Just to note, his comments are with green background and by Michael Arrington (@arrington)

      Here's some of them:
      - Any idea who is hosting their servers ?
      Michael Arrington: the RIAA?

      Michael Arrington: Iâ(TM)ve found itâ(TM)s best to be careful when it comes to last.fm and the truthfulness of their public statements.

      Michael Arrington: iâ(TM)m not even sure where central time is.
      in reply James Wheare: Are you drunk Mike?

      Michael Arrington: i have a special place in my heart for last.fm

      Well, for me these comments sound really unprofessional.

    3. Re:RIAA also says by sopssa · · Score: 4, Informative

      subsystem posted this down in the comments, but everyone should read it. Guardian has actually done some fact checking with it unlike TechCrunch: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/may/28/not-safe-for-work-last-fm

    4. Re:RIAA also says by Digital+Vomit · · Score: 1

      Well, for me these comments sound really unprofessional.

      Agreed. What self-respecting person would use words like "Iâ(TM)ve" and "itâ(TM)s"?

      --
      Modern copyright is theft of culture from everyone and it retards the progress of the useful arts and sciences.
  2. From the Article: by InMSWeAntitrust · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This all leaves us in the same place we were in Februaryâ"with a slew of accusations, a handful of denials, and zero evidence.

    That's what happens when you believe rumors.

    1. Re:From the Article: by SomeJoel · · Score: 3, Funny

      Rumors are almost always more entertaining than the truth. And that's why we read slashdot, right?

      --
      <Complete your profile by adding a signature!>
    2. Re:From the Article: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, who would have thought that Michael Arrington who talks out of his ass 99% of the time was making shit up just to increase traffic to his worthless blog? He's the Perez Hilton of the tech world.

    3. Re:From the Article: by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 3, Funny

      This all leaves us in the same place we were in February—"with a slew of accusations, a handful of denials, and zero evidence.

      Wait a second. Are we talking about the TechCrunch accusations or the RIAA's lawsuits here?

      --
      This guy's the limit!
    4. Re:From the Article: by InMSWeAntitrust · · Score: 5, Funny

      I read slashdot to stay informed of current events in the tech world, and I want the articles to which it links to have factual accuracy and to be researched. This accusation sounds a lot like the wrong person twittered the right thing and now the people involved are knocking some sense into us.

    5. Re:From the Article: by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not to mention that the RIAA's wording "We've made no such request for this information." means precisely squat as to whether they have that information.

      Sure....they didn't ask for it. But that doesn't mean they didn't receive it.

      Don't think about what PR departments say; think about what they _don't_ say. Why exactly did the RIAA word it that way? If they didn't have that information, they would say: "We don't have that information, and never did."

      Yes, I'm cynical. But with an organization like the RIAA, what reason do I have to be otherwise?

      As to Last.fm's statements that they've given that information to noone? Well...noone that the president knows of. Maybe one of the few people that have access to that "tightly controlled" information is a malicious insider. Wouldn't be the first time it happened....

      --
      "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
    6. Re:From the Article: by sopssa · · Score: 1

      I agree with you here. I stopped following his worthless site because of this. Didn't have problems with it before, but oh well.

      Its also funny he kept deleting every comment that he didnt agree with.

    7. Re:From the Article: by davidphogan74 · · Score: 1

      The original story was that they had requested the info, so them saying they have not actually has significance in this case.

    8. Re:From the Article: by afallowhorizon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Don't think about what PR departments say; think about what they _don't_ say. Why exactly did the RIAA word it that way?

      -Exactly-! Why would the RIAA say "We've made no such request for this information." when they could have said "We've made no such request for this information, and neither has the Unified Reptoid Conspiracy which controls us." As it stands now, they've pretty clearly used their carefully crafted lawyer speak to completely leave out any mention of the vast network of cold-blooded alien masters lurking in the shadows. Frankly, that makes me a little suspicious.

    9. Re:From the Article: by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 1

      Ok, I may be cynical, but you're just downright paranoid....

      --
      "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
    10. Re:From the Article: by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      They also didn't say they didn't ask for any information. What if they asked for less, last.fm gave them more, and they proceeded to do evil with the information? The statement would still be factual, yet they would have every bit of data.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    11. Re:From the Article: by pbhj · · Score: 1

      I agree with you here. I stopped following his worthless site because of this. Didn't have problems with it before, but oh well.

      Its also funny he kept deleting every comment that he didnt agree with.

      Along with your other comments here this makes you appear to be astroturfing for Last.fm.

      You say his site had worth previously but due to this one story now does not. How has the information presented on unrelated issues been altered by your opinion WRT this story. What I think you meant to say is that you disprove of the actions of the lead on TechCrunch and so won't visit it anymore - quite different.

      Personally the statement by CBS where they said "we've not sent anything to the RIAA" and then called back and said "when we [CBS] said 'we' we meant of course 'last.fm'" means any chances of me returning to Last.fm have diminished greatly. My personal view following this is that either TC were professionally done over or CBS did the dirty with the RIAA (behind Last.fm's back) - I'm tending towards the later position.

    12. Re:From the Article: by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 2, Funny

      As to Last.fm's statements that they've given that information to noone?

      Today the RIAA announced that Richard Noone Esq. has been promoted to head of the copyright enforcement division.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    13. Re:From the Article: by Allicorn · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Whilst I must salute some quality semantic pedantry there - hats off! - if you read the extensive statements, blog posts and forum messages of the Last.fm team in response to this issue you'll see that there is no "wiggle room" in their wording. They have emphatically denied this in absolutely every sense that some data might have gone somewhere.

      So, Last.fm have denied it. CBS have denied it. The RIAA have denied it.

      TechCrunch have provided no evidence of any kind. What they have come out with is a long-running stream of unsupported, often transparently vitriolic whinges, whines and allegations about Last.fm with never a scrap of evidence or a hint at how they'd have access to it if there ever were any.

      Add to that the fact that the original allegation makes no sense anyway since scrobbler data (containing a list of the track- & artist-name ID3 tags of the media files you've played... tags which are freely editable) would seem to be of no value as either evidence of "theft" or probable cause for further discovery of evidence. This data doesn't say where the track name came from - only that you played a media file with that label. Bought/resold/leant/borrowed/mislabelled... the genuine explanations are endless and nothing in the data should be grounds for any suspicion of "piracy".

      What you end up with is a picture that seems to suggest there's whilst there's definitely a lying douchebag of RIAA-standard involved in this story... it's probably not the RIAA for once.

      --
      OMG!!! Ponies!!!
    14. Re:From the Article: by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      TechCrunch have provided no evidence of any kind. What they have come out with is a long-running stream of unsupported, often transparently vitriolic whinges, whines and allegations about Last.fm with never a scrap of evidence or a hint at how they'd have access to it if there ever were any.

      Completely agree.

      Add to that the fact that the original allegation makes no sense anyway since scrobbler data (containing a list of the track- & artist-name ID3 tags of the media files you've played... tags which are freely editable) would seem to be of no value as either evidence of "theft" or probable cause for further discovery of evidence. This data doesn't say where the track name came from - only that you played a media file with that label. Bought/resold/leant/borrowed/mislabelled... the genuine explanations are endless and nothing in the data should be grounds for any suspicion of "piracy".

      Completely disagree.

      Anyone with scrobbler data for music that hadn't been officially released (GnR Chinese Democracy for about 6 months prior to publication) or has only leaked in limited quantities (such as the U2 album that was actually sold something like 16 times online before the store realized their error) is going to be highly suspicious. In the US at least the MAFIAA has been able to get even more laws passed regarding the piracy of unpublished works - they really came down hard on that guy who leaked GnR's Chinese Democracy.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    15. Re:From the Article: by bonch · · Score: 1

      Not to mention that the RIAA's wording "We've made no such request for this information." means precisely squat as to whether they have that information.

      The original story said that they requested the information, so it is relevant.

      Sure....they didn't ask for it. But that doesn't mean they didn't receive it.

      By that logic, there isn't any proof that the Obama administration isn't the puppet of an evil race of reptilian aliens living deep beneath the earth's crust.

    16. Re:From the Article: by Razalhague · · Score: 1

      That only proves that I know what the names of the tracks are. That's hardly a crime.

      Having Jean Sibelius - Symphony No. 8 scrobbled on my account does not mean I've mysteriously found an intact version of the manuscript and singlehandedly recorded the lost symphony. It means I know how to edit ID3 tags.

    17. Re:From the Article: by luk3Z · · Score: 1

      I think this last.fm reply after so "long" time is too overall and suspicious.

      --
      Recipes for USA bankrupt - http://tinypaste.com/0d66f dd = dollar deluge (printed in the infinity)
    18. Re:From the Article: by johny42 · · Score: 1

      That only proves that I know what the names of the tracks are. That's hardly a crime.

      Of course. But if the RIAA is deciding who to investigate (and hopefully sue) next, guess who they'll choose—a guy (who seems to be) listening to ten old albums periodically, or a guy with a new album twice a day, usually a few weeks before the album's release.

      Of course nothing of this proves anything, but it is a valuable information for RIAA nonetheles.

    19. Re:From the Article: by Alsee · · Score: 1

      scrobbler data [] would seem to be of no value as either evidence of "theft" or probable cause for further discovery of evidence.

      You are wrong about the law. You are confusing "beyond reasonable doubt evidence in CRIMINAL court" with the infinitely lower "51% probable standard to win a civil case", and the even lower standard of "we are suing someone and we have reason to SUSPECT they MIGHT have information relevant to the case in their possession, so the judge is issuing a subpoena for that information for the court to examine".

      The rules for civil cases are vastly different than for criminal cases. Once the RIAA has decided to sue you, they do not need "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" in order to get a subpoena to seize and mirror-copy your computer as evidence. The fact that they have circumstantial evidence that it looks like they might have a civil case against you - the fact that there is an appearance that you may have been infringing their copyright - is plenty for them to get a subpoena for your computer.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    20. Re:From the Article: by khchung · · Score: 1

      No, what RIAA did not say is "We did not receive such information from CBS nor Last.fm". Which would be a clear answer that any PR person would know can absolute stop any rumors.

      "made no such request" could mean they have made other kind of request but only received the data given, or it could mean they did not request but CBS volunteered the data to them.

      The fact that RIAA PR did not opt for a crystal clear answer is a good indication that they have received something from CBS/Last.fm.

      --
      Oliver.
    21. Re:From the Article: by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 1

      By that logic, there isn't any proof that the Obama administration isn't the puppet of an evil race of reptilian aliens living deep beneath the earth's crust.

      That's the difference between not saying something in a specific context, and not saying anything at all.

      Me not saying "I'm not from Pluto" doesn't mean I'm probably from Pluto.

      But a lawyer/PR drone for a corporation not saying "We don't have that information" in response to a specific situation where they've been accused of asking for and receiving that information, speaks volumes.

      --
      "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
    22. Re:From the Article: by Acaeris · · Score: 1

      The Last.FM responses were on the forums to same day as the accusation.

  3. Smells fishy by Tanktalus · · Score: 5, Funny

    I wasn't so sure before, but when the RIAA denies even making the request, well, now I'm paranoid. Methinks [they] doth protest too much.

    1. Re:Smells fishy by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 1

      Oh, come on. Why would they go through the trouble and risk causing a public stir while they can just continue to sit on P2P networks and go fishin'? And before anybody cries "MediaSentry", remember that one need not hack your box to get your i.p. address.

    2. Re:Smells fishy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Methinks [they] doth protest too much.

      The RIAA never requested the information. CBS volunteered it willingly.

    3. Re:Smells fishy by Colonel+Korn · · Score: 1

      Oh, come on. Why would they go through the trouble and risk causing a public stir while they can just continue to sit on P2P networks and go fishin'? And before anybody cries "MediaSentry", remember that one need not hack your box to get your i.p. address.

      1) They want a public stir. That's the point of their anti-piracy campaign. Scaring 10000 file sharers doesn't do much when there are a fifty million other sharers in the same country who don't notice the stir.

      2) The lawsuits haven't slowed piracy.

      3) Even if they had slowed piracy, the only metric by which the recording industry measures anti-piracy success is through their sales. Yes, they've been ridiculously high during the recession, but that doesn't mean they think they're high enough.

      --
      "I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
  4. Sure! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Like the company is going to come right out and tell people.... "we fuckin sold you out to make a quick buck! hahahahaha!"

    Is it logical that the RIAA would want that data? Yup. Would CBS really cooperate with them? Yup.

    I have no problem believing they really did it. And have no problem believing that they would LIE about it. Both are really in their best intrests.

    1. Re:Sure! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      What exactly do you want Last.fm to do? TechCrunch accused them of sharing data, they denied doing such a thing. It's up to TechCrunch to prove it (and no, anonymous emails are not proof) Until TC comes up with some real proof I'm siding with Last.fm on this one

    2. Re:Sure! by MindlessAutomata · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Suddenly, everyone accused of rape fits the bill too!

      Is it logical that Tom would rape the supermodel Tina? Yup. Would her friend Sheri cooperate with the police? Yup.

      I have no problem believing Tom really did it. And have no problem believing he would LIE about it. It's really in his best interest.

      With your logic there's no way for Last.fm to win. Simply because they were accused of it, and because the accusation was plausible, they are guilty. I know these are liberal times and all, but let's not jump the gun.

    3. Re:Sure! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the hell does rape (screwing someone for free) have to do with this issue here. (screwing all the users for money)?

      Just because they both involve someone getting fucked does not make the motives, actions or consequences the same by any measure.

      Winning or losing really depends on which side you are on.

      If you are on the side of big media. last.fm won. they got paid. sold out their users data to the media mafia. and nothing will ever happen to them personally. it's all just a 'rumor' and totally untrue! now come signup for our services.

      If you are on the side of the consumer. last.fm lost. they got caught selling out their users to the media mafia. they lost trust. stay far far away from these scumbags who sold out to the media thugs.

      (shrug) Either way. I'm personally glad i never used their services.

    4. Re:Sure! by rbochan · · Score: 1

      Suddenly, everyone uses a lame straw-man argument!

      --
      ...Rob
      The American Dream isn't an SUV and a house in the suburbs; it's Don't Tread On Me.
  5. Irresponsible Journalism?? by Renderer+of+Evil · · Score: 4, Funny

    From TechCrunch? I refuse to believe that.

    1. Re:Irresponsible Journalism?? by subsystem · · Score: 5, Informative

      Here's an article with some actual fact checking: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/may/28/not-safe-for-work-last-fm (sfw). I didn't like the fact that comments on TechCrunch that offered any opposing viewpoints were promptly deleted.

  6. Uhm... by agnosticanarch · · Score: 4, Funny

    What's a Duckworth?

    --
    I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do.
    1. Re:Uhm... by Endo13 · · Score: 4, Funny

      I dunno, but when I find out I'll send you the bill.

      --
      There is no -1 Disagree mod. Slashdot.org/faq defines mod options. USE IT.
    2. Re:Uhm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just one bill.

    3. Re:Uhm... by MaerD · · Score: 2, Funny

      Somewhere around $4.35 for a mallard, unless you buy in bulk.
      Google, helping me be a smart ass since 1998.

      --
      I put on my robe and wizard hat..
    4. Re:Uhm... by Amazing+Quantum+Man · · Score: 3, Funny

      Just make sure you don't get the estimate from some quack.

      --
      Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
    5. Re:Uhm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why a duck?

    6. Re:Uhm... by machine321 · · Score: 5, Funny

      *ducks*

    7. Re:Uhm... by ArhcAngel · · Score: 1

      Because a vest has no sleeves.

      --
      "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
    8. Re:Uhm... by agnosticanarch · · Score: 1

      I set up the joke, but I get no points... Ah, well.

      --
      I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do.
    9. Re:Uhm... by The+Redster! · · Score: 1

      Must be some fowl moderating.

  7. Yeah and... by Lumpy · · Score: -1, Troll

    Most of the Guards at Auschwitz said they treated prisoners with respect and care...

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:Yeah and... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most of the Guards at Auschwitz said they treated prisoners with respect and care...

      Godwin called, something about a "rule"...

    2. Re:Yeah and... by compro01 · · Score: 1

      What about the rule? He's in perfect accordance with it.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    3. Re:Yeah and... by ringbarer · · Score: -1, Troll

      Techcrunch is run by gutter-scraping jews anyway, so it's an appropriate metaphor.

      What would be more believable? A company pissing away their only source of revenue, or jews spreading lies to drive traffic to their filthy blog?

      --
      "Why did they cancel my favorite Sci-Fi show? I downloaded ALL the episodes!"
    4. Re:Yeah and... by JCSoRocks · · Score: 1

      What rules? Geez, you slashdot Nazis are ruining everything.

      --
      You are using English. Please learn the difference between loose and lose; they're, there, and their; your and you're.
    5. Re:Yeah and... by lavacano201014 · · Score: 1

      Whether you know it or not, you have just invoked Godwin's Law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law). Showing you this rule is the only reason I'm posting: Read and figure out why,

      --
      A wise man once said, "Where is my other quotation mark?
    6. Re:Yeah and... by An+ominous+Cow+art · · Score: 1

      But at least the trolls are running on time.

    7. Re:Yeah and... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

      Godwin's law doesn't apply to me, because I'm not a fat basement virgin. Please stop acting like a petty concentration-camp guard.

    8. Re:Yeah and... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know who else liked making rules....Hitler!!

    9. Re:Yeah and... by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      What would be more believable? A company pissing away their only source of revenue, or jews spreading lies to drive traffic to their filthy blog?

      Not sure. But you know what would be unbelievable? Any Slashdot article that wasn't filled with pitifully ignorant bigotry.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    10. Re:Yeah and... by dotgain · · Score: 1

      GGP is actually commenting on a different story on the front page, yet his comment made this thread. Seems to be happening often, lately. His post would be on-topic in here

    11. Re:Yeah and... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Skinny basement virgins and retarded inbred morons count too so you are covered either way feces for brains.

  8. Why would last.fm, a UK based site by Finallyjoined!!! · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Even consider "sharing" info with the Recording Arse of America?

    Stuff the RIArseA & others, I don't buy retail music anymore, haven't for about 6 years. I have an extensive vinyl, tape & CD library - some in triplicate, i.e. the same album on tape, vinyl & CD (yep, I'm an idiot) but I stopped buying new when the labels started taking legal action against their own customers.

    I do still buy 2nd hand at flea markets & boot sales, but that's by the by.

    Stuff 'em I say, tossers they are, to a man.

    --
    If I had an Ass, I'd call it Fanny Bottom, then I could slap my Ass; Fanny Bottom, on the Arse.
    1. Re:Why would last.fm, a UK based site by harryandthehenderson · · Score: 1

      Why would last.fm, a UK based site

      Which was bought by CBS, an American company, 2 years ago.

    2. Re:Why would last.fm, a UK based site by Finallyjoined!!! · · Score: 1

      Oops, sorry, should have checked first. Foot meet mouth.

      Still, my second point is still valid (until someone else points out more of my failings) :^)

      --
      If I had an Ass, I'd call it Fanny Bottom, then I could slap my Ass; Fanny Bottom, on the Arse.
    3. Re:Why would last.fm, a UK based site by selven · · Score: 1

      It's the "Recording Industry Ass. of America". Learn your abbreviations, you M$ shill.

    4. Re:Why would last.fm, a UK based site by Finallyjoined!!! · · Score: 1

      Can't think for yourself eh sonny? You've just cribbed directly from El Reg.

      Recording industry donkey (equus asinas)
      Recording industry rectum

      I prefer mine :-)

      --
      If I had an Ass, I'd call it Fanny Bottom, then I could slap my Ass; Fanny Bottom, on the Arse.
  9. Perhaps a form of... by Aristophrenia · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...Industrial Espionage?

    Many users may not trust Last.fm after this, regardless of its validity. And we know that many more people have no trust for the RIAA. All things considered, this may have driven much traffic to other similar sites (even with the Streisand Effect) thus providing other sites a chance to increase revenue.

    While this may not be the most likely cause, it is something to consider and contemplate, while making sure one doesn't go too far down the tinfoil hat road.

    For further reading http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_espionage .

    --
    "Yeah, but by we know yo mama gives EVERYBODY root privilege..." -jpetts (208163)
    1. Re:Perhaps a form of... by SchizoStatic · · Score: 1

      I think the general masses won't really care. They will see this and wonder what if any damage would be done if they did share the info. They will continue to use last.fm because they know it and it is familiar.

      --
      https://www.speakservers.com/
    2. Re:Perhaps a form of... by DieNadel · · Score: 0

      Screw Last.fm. Grooveshark has a much better offer, is less anal-retentive and is much more accessible than Last.fm. If only they would provide a plugin for Songbird (or a decent API so someone could make it), they would have a killer internet radio.

      --
      Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
    3. Re:Perhaps a form of... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. At least I can still access Grroveshark for free where I live.

    4. Re:Perhaps a form of... by Dorkmunder · · Score: 1

      weird, I entered 10 artists I listen to regularly and none of them showed up on GrooveShark, none. So much for "... any song in the world. For free". I'll take last.fm with access to all ten of those artists, thanks

    5. Re:Perhaps a form of... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Care to list them?

  10. So, did they get the data? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The RIAA says that they didn't request the data, but note that there is no denial that they received it.

    1. Re:So, did they get the data? by putch · · Score: 5, Insightful

      yeah also note that cbs/last.fm only deny handing over "user info" which is seems like a carefully constructed statement. how exactly do they define "user info?" it implies that they have handed over some info.

      --
      just because I don't care doesn't mean I don't understand!
    2. Re:So, did they get the data? by spyka · · Score: 1

      Well TechCrunch said they handed over IPs, so that would be classed as user info would it not? Hence, if they are denying sending user info they are denying the allegations made against them Last.fm DO, and OPENLY admit to sharing some data with record companies - just read their blog posts - nothing personal of course, just statistical information

    3. Re:So, did they get the data? by Nova77 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      http://www.last.fm/forum/21717/_/535934/8#f9525592

      * We've been in communication with CBS and they deny that they gave any third party any of our user data.

      Also note that a lot of "user info" has always been available through feeds.

    4. Re:So, did they get the data? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TechCrunch said they handed over IPs, so that would be classed as user info would it not?

      "User info" is defined as "personally identifiable information"

      An IP address does not identify a person, as a single person can use more than one IP address, and more than one person can use a single IP address.

      Therefore, an IP address is not "user info". Q.E.D.

      (Of course, when the RIAA gets a hold of them, they'll argue the exact opposite in court, but that's not last.fm's problem ...)

    5. Re:So, did they get the data? by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      Spokespeople talk at carefully constructed cross purposes.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    6. Re:So, did they get the data? by dotgain · · Score: 1
      They actually did say more that wasn't quoted in the blurb. See here

      "[We're] not sure where that rumor came from," RIAA spokesperson Cara Duckworth told Ars on Saturday. "It's not true."

    7. Re:So, did they get the data? by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

      Nor did RIAA receive the data from Last.fm. They received it from the intermediary that received it from Last.fm.

    8. Re:So, did they get the data? by bonch · · Score: 1

      Other than Last.fm strongly denying that they shared anything, of course. But let's ignore that part and continue spreading the rumor through anonymous coward posts on Slashdot.

    9. Re:So, did they get the data? by bonch · · Score: 2, Informative

      The original stories accused them of handing over user data, or personally identifiable data, to the RIAA, so that is what they are denying handing over. Nothing about it "implies that they have handed over some info." You're the one making that assumption for your own reasons. Only on Slashdot could an emphatic denial of something that nobody had any proof of in the first place somehow "imply" that it's in some way true. Sigh.

  11. Slashdot hands over information to Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    I'm an ex-Slashdot employee, ex-astronaut, and ex-president of the Hair Club for Men, and two weeks ago CmdrTaco gave Microsoft the posting history along with IPs, email addresses, favorite colors, your FICO score, and if you like pouring hot grits down your pants for the Bing search engine.

    I'm anonymous, on the Internet, and have no actually proof, so it has to be 100% true! Now is the time to over-react and proclaim you are quitting Slashdot.

    1. Re:Slashdot hands over information to Microsoft by machine321 · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'm quitting Slashdot.

    2. Re:Slashdot hands over information to Microsoft by geekboy642 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Not only am I quitting Slashdot, I'm forming a massive and poorly-written network of interlinking blogs all supporting this exact story!

      --
      Just another "DOJ fascist authoritarian totalitarian bootlicker" -- Zeio
    3. Re:Slashdot hands over information to Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The 8 and the 6 in your uid are reversed, you should fix that.
      -Monk

    4. Re:Slashdot hands over information to Microsoft by dotgain · · Score: 1

      And I edited the Wiki entry now that I've got several corroborating sources.

    5. Re:Slashdot hands over information to Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am quitting Slashdot.

  12. Who cares what they say? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    The reason this story is so hurtful to them is because the ONLY thing keeping your privacy safe is them deciding whether or not to violate it.

    They do not deny having all of this information, or being owned by someone you dont want to have this information. Whether or not they've yet to breach that tiny little divide is irrelevant as long as the potential is there.

  13. f_irst by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    BackwArds. To the Baby take my

  14. By their statements, there's nothing official but by TheGreatOrangePeel · · Score: 1

    ... I can't help but to wonder if the RIAA is scraping the data and Last.fm is letting it slide.

  15. OK... Now i believe them by Ezrymyrh · · Score: 0

    With the RIAA backing them up? No way they would lie, I know because they promised me a pony.

    --
    The love of good Whiskey,Woman,Weed is all i need.
  16. How Dare You by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 1

    "Share"! As if Last.fm would give such valuable data away for free.

    --
    May the Maths Be with you!
    1. Re:How Dare You by jank1887 · · Score: 1

      no no no... sharing is only okay when the information is of value to someone else

  17. Hmmm, Credibility.... by Bob9113 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    So, who do I trust more:

    1. The RIAA PR person, the CBS PR person, and the Last.fm PR person.
    -- or --
    2. A completely unverifiable source who may have an axe to grind or other nefarious motive for completely fabricating the story.

    Frankly, it's a tough call.

    --
    Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
    1. Re:Hmmm, Credibility.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uncle Arthur used to have a saying. "Shoot em' all and let God sort it out." Unfortunately, one day he put his theory into practice. It took 75 federal marshals to bring him down. Now, let's never speak of him again.

    2. Re:Hmmm, Credibility.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not at all. I am fully confident that Techcrunch are full of shit.

    3. Re:Hmmm, Credibility.... by pbhj · · Score: 1

      So, who do I trust more:

      1. The RIAA PR person, the CBS PR person, and the Last.fm PR person.
      -- or --
      2. A completely unverifiable source who may have an axe to grind or other nefarious motive for completely fabricating the story.

      Frankly, it's a tough call.

      Well at least now CBS have started libel proceedings against TC the truth will come out in court. Oh wait.

      Now what possible reason might the CBS have for believing they could fail in court, after all TC is all just scurrilous lies ....

    4. Re:Hmmm, Credibility.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is no Last.fm PR person.

  18. Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What type of user data were they supposedly passing onto the RIAA?

  19. Don't know about the duck.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The windshield he tried to fly through cost me $300 to replace, though......

  20. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  21. Hang on... by godIsaDJ · · Score: 1

    ... They claim that they can't distinguish between streamed music and music from your collection. That would make sense unless they planned to rat out users with illegal collections. It seems a lot of trouble to go through and makes little sense to me...

  22. "Confirmed" or "claimed?" by serutan · · Score: 1

    Can the RIAA ever be said to have "confirmed" anything when we pretty much assume that everything they say is a lie?

  23. whoosh by BitterAndDrunk · · Score: 1

    You failed your Perception check for humor. May have been a critical miss, in fact.

    --
    You better watch out, there may be dogs about . . .
    1. Re:whoosh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Godwin's Law is srs business, guize.

  24. TechCrunch and Pandora by meehawl · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Pandora's main competition for mindshare is Last.FM. There's also a bit of a US/EU rivalry, with Pandora so strongly identified with the US and, with the Valley in particular, while Last.FM came out of a Euro milieu. I think I've noticed a very pro-Pandora coverage pattern at TechCrunch. Lots of the "Web 2 - Me Too" AdSense spam sites, sorry, gadget/tech blogs, take cues from TechCrunch, and among the iPhone-toting, US-centric crowd, Pandora is a darling.

    Before I'd believe anything TechCrunch said about Last.FM, I'd want to know more about the personal and financial connections between the people running TechCrunch and the people running Pandora.

    Personally, I've tried Pandora every years and it fails, epically, to even know about many of the artists I am interested in hearing. Plus, Pandora's Flash interface is just aggravating, user-hostile, and screams hipster-designer-marketroid-douchbags-in-control.

    --

    Da Blog
    1. Re:TechCrunch and Pandora by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      I'll admit, I don't follow this sort of crap any more, Last.FM seems really silly to me, but to each his own, it makes FAR more sense than twitter.

      But ... WTF is Pandora? I'm an American and I know what last.fm is, I have no clue what Pandora is off the top of my head. I do now of course because of what I can infer from your comment and the quick google I did, but my point to all this rambling is that I don't think Pandora is more well known in the US than last.fm. Of course, I am but one man and hardly a valid statistical sample.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    2. Re:TechCrunch and Pandora by Red+Flayer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      FWIW, the Valley is a small place. One of Arrington's first interviews was Tim Westergren, founder of Pandora.

      There doesn't need to be any fiduciary interest on Arrington's part, familiarity with Pandora might be all it takes to make him favor Pandora.

      And also, not sure where you're getting the concept of a big rivalry between Pandora and Last.fm. I've observed no such thing... just that people use what they are comfortable with. Maybe there're fanboys sprouting up, but I think you're overanalyzing.

      IMO, Arrington's just a twit. Twits exist independently of financial arrangements.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    3. Re:TechCrunch and Pandora by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      IIRC.. wasn't Pandora blocked for non US-IPs? Would explain the rivalry. Or rather the ignorance.

      --
      bickerdyke
    4. Re:TechCrunch and Pandora by Mordaximus · · Score: 1

      Pandora's main competition for mindshare is Last.FM. There's also a bit of a US/EU rivalry, with Pandora so strongly identified with the US and...

      There isn't much of a rivalry at all. Firstly, anyone can use Last.fm, Pandora is restricted to the US. But tthat aside, they aren't really even similar services at all.

  25. I'm doubt last.fm would knowingly break the law... by ChowRiit · · Score: 1

    last.fm is an English company, with its servers located in London. Complying to such a request for user data would be illegal under UK data protection laws, as best as I can tell.

    Not saying that proves much either way, but for what it's worth I've always found last.fm fairly open and engaged with its users. I rather doubt they would knowingly give away user's data, especially given its illegality.

  26. You& Fai7 It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Redundant

    they want you to superior to sl0w, surveys show that their parting EVERYDAY...REDEFINE Progress. In 1992, '*BSD Sux0rs'. This disgust, or been own lube, beverage, is the ultimate Triumphs would soon to decline for told reporters, NetBSD user backwards. To the a previously during this file butts are exposed and sling or table track of where '*BSD Sux0rs'. This [SAMAG.COM] IN THE world. GNAA members house... pathetic. Host what the house OF AMERICA irc So on, FreeBSD went 800 w/512 Megs of Me if you'd like, long term survival current core were is wiped off and and easy - only

    1. Re:You& Fai7 It by sdBlue · · Score: 1

      Um, WHAT? Even for an AC, this has to be the most bizarre post I've seen. (I'm sure others have seen worse :)

    2. Re:You& Fai7 It by BitZtream · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I guess you haven't noticed the influx of spam? That message isn't a real message, is some computer generated spam, probably some sort of megahal like bot that combs slashdot and tries to post comments to see what kind of score it can get. Having played with megahal quite a bit, I'd say that it actually probably isn't megahal itself as megahal would have done a better job of forming sentences, but someone elses attempt to do the same thing. Probably some PhD student or something using other peoples resources to do his research, lazy bastage. He'll make a perfect professor though, since about the only reason they are 'professors' is so they can get paid to do research they want rather than thier jobs, and get cheap ass labor from the students, which you and I pay for in taxes.

      Every story posted will have multiple messages like this if you notice them before they drop below your viewing threshold.

      Frankly I'm surprised you are the first person I've seen mention it.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    3. Re:You& Fai7 It by sdBlue · · Score: 1

      Thanks for pointing that out; this is the first time I've personally noticed it, but I guess that's because I tend to keep my threshold pretty high as you mentioned.... And I'm usually late to start reading stories (using google reader now).. I do share your surprise that none of the slashdotters who are more active than myself haven't mentioned it before though!

  27. Re:I'm doubt last.fm would knowingly break the law by pbhj · · Score: 1

    Which is why the RIAA would ask the CBS for the info. If such a situation were true.

  28. Even if it's not true by scarboni888 · · Score: 1

    I have a bad taste in my mouth after finding out that lastfm (corporate whore) was owned or someways affiliated with cbs. I'll stick with soma.fm spank you very much.

  29. As Johnny Rotten has said... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Fuck EMI!

    Fuck CBS

    Fuck Last.fm

    ... and (quoting Frank Zappa): FUCK WARNER BROS!

  30. Overanalysed by meehawl · · Score: 1

    Maybe incipient twittery could enable a person to be easily swayed by a "source" that has twice failed to produce anything beyond stern denials. I'd love to see this story go somewhere else because, if true, it would be juicy. But so far *nobody* else has managed to verify anything of what TechCrunch has claimed. Given the leakage quotient in SV, the lack of confirmation weighs heavily against the veracity of the story. It's making me file this TechCrunch "exclusive" in the same slushpile that I use for anything Apple-related from Jim Goldman and reflects poorly on their other "exclusives".

    --

    Da Blog
  31. I did not have sexual relations... by d0n0vAn · · Score: 1

    'I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinski.' You can say you didn't until you're blue in the face but if we believe you did it.... Look at it this way, remember when you said we were guilty of illegal file sharing and we said we didn't do it? Maybe you see my point, now?

  32. Similarity Breeds Contempt by meehawl · · Score: 1

    they aren't really even similar services at all

    I know they use different approaches to personalisation. Last uses collaborative filtering, a "bottom-up" approach, whereas Pandora uses parametrised affinity allocations, a "top-down" approach. But for their users, both services promote personalised music selection, adaptive and iterative improvement of personalisation, streaming, and social networking between affinity groups.

    How are they *not* similar?

    --

    Da Blog