>My anonymous source was testing how long they could get away with constantly streaming their own 45-second track on Spotify, to see whether the company had mechanisms in places to restrict artists from playing their own songs on repeat, and whether those micropennies per play would add up to some real cash. They racked up about 45,000 plays over a month before receiving this takedown email.

So what did this "annonomous source" do with the monies received from the 45,000 plays? Because describing it as a "test" is pretty generous to the person trying to game the system. A less flattering perspective might call it "attempted fraud" because it sure sounds self-serving.

>Sure, that's dirty play, and in a general sense, the action taken by Spotify in this case is justified and correct. But on closer inspection, the notice reveals a few troubling issues that could forecast a dark future for music fans.

No, it means that people trying to scam retailers won't be allowed to scam retailers. What is so difficult to understand?

>For one, Spotify took the extreme measure of removing the song entirely without any kind of probation or appeal process. A logical endgame of this type of defensive action is an environment where a corporation gets to decide how users listen to music.

Oh, I see, this author has an ingrained perspective of entitlement. Right. Well, I don't share their opinion.

Frankly I think DistroKid should ban that "testing" jackass and cite this specific article as why it happened. Mostly I think this as a happy DistroKid client.

>Take the case of Matt Farley, who released some 14,000 original songs on Spotify and iTunes, some with celebrity names in the title enticing people to play the tracks to earn some revenue for his efforts.

Yeah, DistroKid now has a checkbox hoop to jump through exactly because of this kind of shithead, counter-productive behavior. That's not engaging in art. That's being a shyster abusing the market for art.

Every time one of these "clever" little stunts gets pulled, I have to do more work on my end to prove I'm legit. It's not terribly difficult to work with, but it means DistroKid is having to adjust and spend time and effort in areas not primary to their service. That makes me pretty ticked off, both for the sake of DistroKid, and the potential jeopardizing of being able to maintain storefront access as an independent when clowns keep trying to steal from the "Take a penny" tray.