On Friday night a technology blog called Techcrunch posted a vicious and completely false rumour about us: that Last.fm handed data to the RIAA so they could track who’s been listening to the “leaked” U2 album.
I denied it vehemently on the Techcrunch article, as did several other Last.fm staffers. We denied it in the Last.fm forums, on twitter, via email – basically we denied it to anyone that would listen, and now we’re denying it on our blog.
According to Ars Technica, even the RIAA don’t know where the rumour came from. The Ars Technica article is worth a read by the way, as it explains how the album was leaked in the first place by U2’s record label.
All the data and technical side of Last.fm is hosted in London and run by the team here. We keep a close eye on what data mining jobs we run, not because we’re paranoid the RIAA is trying to infiltrate us, but because time on our Hadoop Cluster (where the data lives) is so precious and we have lots of important jobs that run every day. It’s simply impossible for anyone to run a job without the team here noticing.
When you signup to Last.fm and scrobble what you listen to, you are trusting us with your listening data. We take this very seriously. The old-timers on Last.fm who’ve been with us since the early days can attest to this – we’ve always been very open and transparent about how your data is used. This hasn’t changed. We never share personally identifiable data such as email and IP addresses. The only type of data we make available to labels and artists, other than what you see on the site, is aggregate data of listeners and number of plays.
Artists and labels can login to our MusicManager site to upload new content and update their catalogue. The MusicManager is also where artists and labels can see statistics on how popular their content is with Last.fm users.
If you were U2’s record label and logged in to the MusicManager today, you would see this:
…and you could pat yourself on the back for a successful album launch. All the controversy and press coverage surrounding the leaked release caused an obvious spike in the number of people listening to U2 recently.
So do us a favour – if you see people spreading the rumour, refer them to this blog post and mention you heard from a friend that “Techcrunch are full of shit.”
Comments
Kevin
23 February, 16:10
http://twitter.com/blogfisher/statuses/1241244495
Damien
23 February, 16:16
Retweeted!
=]
Cougar
23 February, 16:17
Miaow! good response. It has to be said that as Last.fm grows larger these questions will keep popping up.
What techcrunch failed to notice was that if they wanted to labels could send this data (presented above)to the RIAA.
Fiona McLaren
23 February, 16:18
Hear, hear.
katie
23 February, 16:22
Yea RJ – rock on.
Niamh
23 February, 16:23
True dat.
Macca
23 February, 16:24
Great summary RJ, thanks for the clarity.
Here’s looking forward to the TechCrunch apology :)
@KatsuMooMoooo
23 February, 16:25
thank you very much for the public clarifications. the paranoia started to sink in for many people, including myself, of what might happen were this article true, but it seemed to go against the way you run your company, and against the quality of the work you’ve been doing (great) — given how personal some people feel about their music data, i’d say continuing to be vocal about your transparency is a good idea, and i imagine you are going to need to continuously prove to people somehow that you are beyond the grip of record label control (despite your parent company, etc) and would not succumb to such pressure, in a similar way to how facebook must prove (hopefully) that it defends its user’s data and rights. good luck and keep up the excellent work!
tgpo
23 February, 16:26
I’ve been telling people this sounded too out there to be true.
ID3 information is too easy to change to be used for any legal proceedings, so the only reasons they would want the information can be found on in the stats area U2’s profile page.
Ian
23 February, 16:28
Love the candidness of this post, good on ya last.fm
Matthew Ogle
23 February, 16:35
@Cougar, that’s true, but the aggregate data simply wouldn’t be of any legal use to the RIAA. Even where individual Last.fm usernames are shown (like on the ‘listeners’ tabs on the public website), this information cannot be tied back to an IP/email/physical address.
For those who prefer it, however, it’s worth pointing out that we have a variety of privacy options for any users who would like to hide their real-time listening status.
CraigGrocott
23 February, 16:35
Surely if the RIAA wanted to they could just go here: http://www.last.fm/music/U2/+listeners
And looked at who’s playing tracks from the new album? If you’re stupid enough to scroble pirated music pre release day then you’re asking for trouble. It’s like walking into HMV with a sign on your back saying “I steal stuff”.
Joel
23 February, 16:35
I knew it wasn’t true. And I’m one of the ‘old-timers’. thanks for responding here, RJ.
Edd
23 February, 16:35
I take your word for it that TechCrunch is wrong on this, but the tone of your headline and finishing comment are surely there to add flames to this fire?
For all practical purposes, Last.fm is an extremely successful UK online business but surely you want to work with TechCrunch in the future?
S.
23 February, 16:40
I love you guys.
Babs
23 February, 16:41
TechCrunch were out of order with that article and owe both Last.fm and the users who deleted their accounts an unequivocal apology.
Someone else they ought to apologise to is U2. To me, the TechCrunch article came across as some sort of sordid publicity stunt, so when I listened to U2’s new album last night, I wasn’t favourably disposed. If I were to write a review, no one would thank me. It would be negative.
Some people say there’s no such thing as bad publicity, but this just proves there is. The article was nasty, vicious and harmful.
Greg Gurevich
23 February, 16:44
Thanks!
joshua hatfield
23 February, 16:46
what makes u2’s leak any more special than the cds that have been shared for years? i think if the riaa wanted to come for you, they would’ve done it long ago.
fk techcrunch.
Someonesomeone
23 February, 16:47
me changes ID3 tags of some creative commons music into U2 names, then waits for letter from the RIAA :P
Seriously now, thanks for your post, Last.fm staff. It’s appreciated.
Greg Paradee
23 February, 16:47
Awesome, TechCrunch is getting worse and worse.
Kim
23 February, 16:48
Time Magazine’s most overrated blogs:
http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1879276_1879093,00.html
maarten
23 February, 16:49
straight up, good luck to you Last
Someonesomeone
23 February, 16:50
@joshua:
What supposedly makes it more special is that there is not a single legal way someone supposedly could have scrobbled a song with U2 id3 tags (though as I just said above, they very well could have actually)
The Last.fm data for albums that are already legally available cannot tell the labels in any way how the user listens to the music. If you have 1000 CDs in your last.fm profile, they can’t tell whether you listened to them through your CD player, or in Winamp after torrenting, or in iTunes after buying.
Vieviurka
23 February, 16:59
Thansk for the explanation. Too bad I deleted my account on Friday…
Sylvain
23 February, 17:01
I didn’t have to read an article about Last.FM to know they are full of shit. They still consider music as goods
Mustaqil Ali
23 February, 17:02
@CraigGrocott
The thing is, they’ll only usernames, which they cannot find the email addresses, IPs or physical addresses of. At least – not via Last.fm.
@Babs
And U2 should apologise to everyone for producing new music.
alastair
23 February, 17:03
Frankly, if you have information about people who have stolen a U2 album, you have a moral obligation to provide it on request to U2’s representatives, whoever they may be.
This business of protecting people who do things that are morally wrong, solely on the basis that they deserve some kind of “privacy” when committing their unethical activity of choice, is itself unethical and amoral and makes matters considerably worse.
Now, it may well be that last.fm doesn’t have any information that would be helpful (doubtful, but possible), but I for one think that there is nothing whatsoever wrong with sharing it if you have it.
Jonty
23 February, 17:07
@Vieviurka: As soon as we saw the TC article we suspended the system that cleans out user accounts marked for deletion, expecting that people would do exactly as you did.
If you contact our support team (support [at] last.fm) we should be able to restore your account and scrobbles.
Stefan Constantinescu
23 February, 17:14
I knew it had to be bullshit. Two of my friends deleted their accounts, but since I live in Finland where they do not prosecute against copyright law I decided that even if the Tech Crunch story was true I would simply not give a shit about U2.
Good to know that it was Tech Crunch who was full of shit!
Frank
23 February, 17:15
That’s good to hear.
I use to read TechCrunch myself but it became very sensational and biased. More, like you guys said, shit than news.
Babs
23 February, 17:28
@ alastair – depends on your point of view, but personally, I don’t see it as an issue of morality.
This same argument has been doing our heads in since the days of hometaping. Anyone who buys into the music industry’s bleating about buying in every format or woebetide has been brainwashed.
If anything, it is immoral that the music industry insists that we buy something without full disclosure of the contents. We are expected to hand over money for an unknown quantity.
Copies of something are always make do. They can never compare to owning the real thing. If sales have fallen in recent years, all to the good. People are now better able to make decisions on purchases and no doubt, they actually love everything they’ve bought, instead of being forced to return albums to snotty record sales assistants who make things difficult. Returns have always been discouraged so most people end up finding they’ve wasted a whole load of money on not very much.
People who did download the new U2 did nothing wrong. It’s the same as hearing an album at a friend’s house, or someone making a copy on cassette. We just have better tech for it nowadays.
Dave
23 February, 17:30
PLEASE sue these lying bastards! CBS has plenty of cash to take on these scoundrels!
Sean Bradford
23 February, 17:35
Retweeted, and ran a story for this on Neowin.net: http://www.neowin.net/news/main/09/02/23/lastfm-sends-a-memo-to-techcrunch-youre-full-of-st
Don’t back down, in my opinion this was a stunt pulled for a one-time-post-of-fame.
Tobias
23 February, 17:45
We all know that Michael Arroganton of TC hates europe….
Ben
23 February, 17:48
I’m not surprised. After all, the TechCrunch article was written by Erick Schonfeld, aka, the worst thing that ever happened to TechCrunch. He is single handedly killing that site. He’s a complete tool.
Jason
23 February, 17:49
Great post! It’s about time that more people call TechCrunch out for being the shills that they are. They report bogus claims and rumors, then try to hide behind the label of “journalism.”
They are the paparazzi of the tech world, and we’d all be better off without their drivel.
Henry Rose
23 February, 17:49
Techcrunch is a force of evil on the internet, Last.fm is a source of hope. Micheal Arrington and his pack of goons are reason enough for legitimate journalists to shun bloggers, which is really quite sad.
Thank you Last.fm for your awesome service which i’ll continue to use and enthusiastically promote!
John
23 February, 17:51
I’m as anti-lawsuit as they come, but you really ought to sue Erick Schonfeld for defamation. He has definitely damaged your reputation. I believe you guys 100% but I’m sure you lost both current and potential future users from this bullshit story.
Joe Szabo
23 February, 17:56
As Tobias eluded, this sounds like the “old” Don Cherry blasting hockey players who were born and/or played outside North American borders.
Good on you guys; your defense here is solid.
jeff
23 February, 17:57
yea right last.fm.
we all know you have been handing over data to riaa for some time.
You’re obviously just back pedaling and denying this story because you’re losing a ton of user accounts today…
How many users do you have now?
Naz
23 February, 17:58
The people at TC are a bunch of pompous rabbiting losers, I doubt anyone believed the article they posted.
Nice post, well done.
jr
23 February, 18:00
U2 Sucks anyway.
pbx
23 February, 18:01
wouldn’t that be “Techcrunch is full of shit”? :)
Kevin
23 February, 18:01
Did TechCrunch ever issue a retraction or apology?
Alex
23 February, 18:03
I can’t belive people have been deleting accounts over this bollocks. That’s well harsh.
I knew this would be bull shit (before even seeing the via TechCrunch line).
How much legal standing does the string “Alex is listening to: some lame U2 song.” have anyway? Exactly none I’m betting.
Like Dave said above, CBS should seek some legal recorse for slander.
Jim Gaudet
23 February, 18:03
You run a great service, keep up the good work.
eraevion
23 February, 18:04
Title says it all.
Joe Grossberg
23 February, 18:05
Bravo!
TechCrunch frequently deals in rumor, gossip and slander — not news — and they deserve to be called on it.
Penguin Pete
23 February, 18:06
You JUST NOW noticed that TechCrunch is full of shit? Don’t worry, nobody pays attention to them any more. They’re nothing but a tabloid.
Alexander Schek
23 February, 18:11
Richard,
I totally agree with your post, not only because I know how Last.fm works since its beginnings, but also because TC is loosing momentuum in the community, and a little controvery is a traffic spiker for them.
Rock on!
jult
23 February, 18:15
Why all the fuss about that useless new album? Who cares about music that shitty anyway? U2 should have stopped making albums in 1990.
So you can leak the shit all you want, and then pretend it’s something big and some kind of enormous loss for the record company, but nobody I know is buying that. Mark my words. It will not sell because it’s worthless.
Manan
23 February, 18:15
Good job guys! Techcrunch is becoming a stupid blog. They are over rated. For some reason i kinda get why Arrington got spat at.
Gor
23 February, 18:17
Well even if the story wasn’t true, you proved yourself right and TC proved themselves as nothing more than a vicious rumour mills.
Cashton Coleman
23 February, 18:20
Yeah, I keep nailing Erick just about every other day on their Twitter secretions. The Last.fm post they made was probably a combination of politics and a publicity stunt on their part. After all, with such sloppy reporting, they have to find a way to attract readers.
Last thing I told Erick was this:
Blog + No balance = advertising = no audience.
His response was that I was trying to hijack his comment thread because he chose not to write about my startup (now I’m actually glad he didn’t). But you see the kind of narcissistic view on life that he has based on what he writes. It’s a real shame.
Babs
23 February, 18:23
The Telegraph takes a clear side – Last.fm’s: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/milo_yiannopoulos/blog/2009/02/23/lastfm_speaks_out_over_leaked_u2_album_techcrunch_are_full_of_
CM
23 February, 18:26
@jeff – how do you know this? Proof?
It is tools like you that feed techcrunch the bullshit information intended for defamation – your thoughts on the matter are about as important as a sack full of cat testicles. Actually I shouldn’t give you that much credit as your intelligence isn’t as much your fault as it is your parents.
Jared Covington
23 February, 18:26
Thanks Last.fm—honesty like this is one of the reasons that I continue to use your service…
Mark Evertz
23 February, 18:29
Grammar dork correction on the headline: TechCrunch is full of s***! otherwise, good stuff. blip.fm you better not share my info either!
Please let me know when the Pearl Jam new release is pre-released on accident by the record label at Last.fm as well.
Cheers,
M
Cussing
23 February, 18:32
Techcrunch is turning into the National Enquirer for Tech Gossip. It doesn’t matter if it’s true. They run it anyways. Why? Because they are no longer relevant to their mission statement.
Most OVERRATED BLOG and Time agrees.
http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1879276_1879093_1879075,00.html
NO INTEGRITY…. Gossip rag.
Seriously. Sue their ASSES.
Designer
23 February, 18:34
that’s really bad
Magdalene
23 February, 18:34
jeez…is Tech Crunch still in that Anti-Last.fm crusade? is not the first time they throw shit at you guys for no reason…what’s wrong with those people? and how those web readers supposedly grown on wikipedia turned into these dumb masses?…people that picks whatever information they see as the Supreme Truth… without even having a look at a source or practical fact…
Tech savy readers huh? this is totally depressing…
batman
23 February, 18:35
TC is just uninteresting.
An advice : remove Techcrunch from you rss feed to earn some free time. Without anger, just follow your reason.
Joe
23 February, 18:36
Great post , I might write something about it.
@Livecrunch
Jas McCree
23 February, 18:42
ARE vs. IS? Hmm…
RJ
23 February, 18:45
Hi everyone, thanks for the kind words of support!
Regarding the grammar point:
As far as I know, using “are” instead of “is” is valid English in Britain in this case, because Techcrunch can be considered plural. Not 100% sure, and a bit late to change it.. If I have to call TC out again I’ll use “is” – didn’t realise “are” was incorrect in US English.
RJ
CosmicDog
23 February, 18:46
@Mark Evertz
If one is using TechCrunch to refer to a single entity, then you are correct (TechCrunch is full of shit). However, it is equally valid to use TechCrunch to refer to a collection of individuals, in which case the plural verb matching rule applies (TechCrunch are full of shit).
Grammatically speaking, both are correct, but they are saying different things.
Adam
23 February, 18:46
The shocking popularity of U2 recently is beacuse of the release and leak of new album, not only because of this provocation from TC.
Todd
23 February, 18:57
As a CBS employee, that is a huge relief to hear.
John Koetsier
23 February, 18:58
Technically, wouldn’t that be “TechCrunch is full of shit?
Just asking …
Michael S.
23 February, 19:01
It was written by Eric Schonfeld, or as I like to refer to him as “Captain Cut ‘n Paste” as he rarely researches his articles and has a tendency to copy from other blogs. When it comes to tech he is clueless, relies on second and third hand information and does not have any actual technical skills so does not understand shit in the tech industry. His writing is full of spelling and factual errors and his biggest asset is his ego which can fill a room even though he has never built a company himself and is just a critic. Eric Schonfeld is a tool and this article of his is further proof.
Jane Howitt
23 February, 19:04
Umm… who’s TechCrunch?
Never heard of ‘em.
But HAVE heard of last.fm. And I love you guys. Best thing I’ve found online for months.
Babs
23 February, 19:10
IT World takes sides – Last.fm’s:
http://www.itworld.com/business/63085/lastfm-tech-crunch-and-riaa
Everybody is commenting on blogging and responsibility. The writer of the IT World blog puts it:
“…the situation exposes a lot of questions about blogging and responsibility. When a site with TechCrunch’s clout posts a story like this, it can have a very real impact on the bottom line of whatever company is maligned.”
Anyone else wondering whether it’s correct to say ‘TechCrunch is” or “TechCrunch are” – please see CosmicDog’s post, 23 February, 18:46
Servaas
23 February, 19:12
Well said. Hope the world sees TC as it really is: Overrated and irrelevant.
Techcrunch
23 February, 19:13
So what VC’s are they involved with that use a music platform?
This article is just plain defamation. And I would expect a full retraction or sue their asses off the web.
lessthanzero
23 February, 19:13
Fair enough, I’m calm enough again. And unsubscribed from their lame and shitty feed. Because Techcrunch are full of shit!
I’ve pirated the leaked U2 myself, and hope that I would never make a same mistake again, because not just TC, but Bono and his mates are full of shit as well…
Corey D
23 February, 19:15
tech crunch has yet to write an accurate article about the music-tech space. their music-tech product reviews are ok, but anything else is generally misinformed. Arrington just doesn’t understand the space, the legalities, the complications of copyright, etc. i think many of us have some guesses as to where this recent false “tip” came from, but a discerning journalist in the music-tech space would have caught it before printing. kudos for this blogpost. In addition as one in the music business i’d like to thank you for providing rightsholders with graphed data, it’s one of the few stats we have right now and I find it extremely valuable to strategizing marketing online for music projects.
steve
23 February, 19:15
last.fm being in London, no, it would be “are”.
http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=plural+verb+companies+english&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a
I’m actually less surprised that some random blog with no evidence turns out to be full of shit than I am surprised that people are dim enough to rush out and delete their accounts based on some random blog with no evidence.
GSaint
23 February, 19:18
I doubt Techcrunch will apologize. Techrunch = The National Inquirer.
Pete
23 February, 19:20
Hell yes – kudos for standing up to the trash talking @£$%s!
Jay Moonah
23 February, 19:23
OMG! I just read the original TechCrunch article, they are SO amazingly full of it! I particularly liked this:
“But most probably never even considered it a possibility that individually identifiable information about their listening habits (legal, illegal, or otherwise) could be handed over to an organization known for taking consumers to court for file-sharing.”
Clearly this dolt hasn’t actually visited the site to know that ONE OF THE MAIN THINGS IT DOES is share people’s tracks publicly. Duh.
http://www.last.fm/user/musicface if anyone wants to spy on me. ;-)
Keep up the great work folks, you’ve been my fave site/service for years.
Turd Durden
23 February, 19:24
LOL, who gives a flying sh1t?
Some Anonymous Coward
23 February, 19:24
And the blowhard wonders why people spit on him. Just saying…
Ossuary
23 February, 19:30
I was wondering when it would get an official post. My fingers were crossed it was not true, because if it was, I would never use Last again. Lots of other services out there and this would have pushed me (and I am guessing lots of others) to one of them.
Stephen Thompson
23 February, 19:30
I would be interesting to take a look at TechCrunch’s editors investment portfolio, to see if they have a competitor to Last.fm listed.
Juan pablo 192
23 February, 19:35
Love Last.fm most than anything nao
Hillary
23 February, 19:37
SUE TECHCRUNCH INTO OBLIVION!!!
You are a UK company, and Techcrunch is accessible in the UK.
The UK has the STRONGEST DEFAMATION AND LIBEL LAWS IN THE WORLD. THIS IS THE ONLY WAY TO DEFEND YOUR HONOUR AND MAKE THESE IRRESPONSIBLE “JOURNALISTS” PAY.
Money talks. BS walks.
I’d love to see you guys bankrupt them, as no amount of legal fees in the world can save them if in fact they published an untrue rumour.
UNDER UK LAW, THAT IS DEFAMATION.
Lee
23 February, 19:40
Edd – I would hope Last.fm (and any self-respecting company) would avoid working with TC for any reason.
They often post rumors that turn out to be untrue without retraction, and in general, the articles are poorly written and unjustly biased. I would advise anyone reading that site to look elsewhere. I like Mashable, for instance.
(Disclaimer: I’m not affiliated in any way with either of these sites.)
Daya Baran
23 February, 19:44
CBS should sue Techcrunch for slander. Everything they write is suspect http://www.webguild.org/2009/02/cbs-blasts-web-20-bygone-techcrunch-as-full-of-sht.php
Techcrunch
23 February, 19:51
They won’t let me post to their new response.
Update 4 (2/23/09): Last.fm co-founder Richard Jones expands on his denial in comments with an official post on the Last.fm blog.
It’s not just them you dumbass. It’s several news sources that say you’ve done wrong.
http://blog.last.fm/2009/02/23/techcrunch-are-full-of-shit
http://arstechnica.com/media/news/2009/02/riaa-denies-rumors-that-lastfm-turned-over-data.ars
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/milo_yiannopoulos/blog/2009/02/23/lastfm_speaks_out_over_leaked_u2_album_techcrunch_are_full_of_
And dozens more.
MAN FUCKING UP. YOU WERE FUCKING WRONG.
james
23 February, 20:17
You’re just trying to cover your tracks. Nice try though. Crazy idea that the RIAA would want access to a huge database of peoples habits and what they are listening to.
This is just a glimpse of the way you abuse user data, no wonder you’re fighting back so hard
QXX
23 February, 20:22
You guys freaking rock I love your music DONT CHANGE A F*CKING THING
hmart
23 February, 20:23
Techcrunch dont deserves its popularity they S**KS
ak
23 February, 20:26
Who the fuck still listens to U2 anyways? Bono?
ekolod
23 February, 20:29
It’s not a crazy idea that RIAA would want access to the database, although it is a crazy idea that LastFM would give it to them, given the massive strike their reputation would take.
BrickandClick
23 February, 20:34
Techcrunch “is”, not “are”. Same for RIAA. “It/is” when referring to an organization/entity (singular).
Grammar Police :-)
Fuck Techcrunch
23 February, 20:45
Demand full retraction in every single blog post of theirs.
http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/02/23/picnik-is-emerging-as-one-of-the-fastest-growing-photo-sites-on-the-web/#comments
Ole
23 February, 20:52
That’s the final straw… I’m unsubscribing from TechCrunch.
Policing the Grammar Police Since 2009
23 February, 20:52
To all the grammar cops: USAGE VARIES BETWEEN BRITISH AND AMERICAN speakers when it comes to corporate noun/verb agreement. Both can be correct, depending on speaker/writer and context.
Welcome to international English, learn to live with it!
Anthony
23 February, 20:52
Glad to see that you’re defending your position.
Matt
23 February, 20:53
@BrickandClick: Last.fm are British. We use both.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_and_British_English_differences#Formal_and_notional_agreement
amil
23 February, 21:03
Rock on guys!
Anon Coward
23 February, 21:10
Shouldn’t you sue for libel?
Mojo Denbow
23 February, 21:16
TechCrunch is still around? I unsubscribed from TC because of that arrogant SOB Arrington. He wants to build a new media empire but is quickly resorting to old media practices.
Keep on rockin!
*found via Twitter
New Music
23 February, 21:18
Why don’t you sue them then?
If the new story by Techcrunch is so patently false then surely you are duty bound to legalise their attempt to rock your boat. i.e Sue the shit out of them.
Last.fm’s lack of mentioning the word ‘legal’ has me wondering…
mista man
23 February, 21:40
tweet tweet
joe
23 February, 21:41
You see if we didn’t have these crappie copyright laws last.fm would not have to post this blog. It’s time to reform copyright don’t you think? When was the last time the the copyright actually ‘promoted the progress of science forward’ I know when the last time it had an effect on a greedy corporations bank account.
Chucho
23 February, 21:43
TechCrunch has a couple of bloggers that are a complete morons.
Can’t you sue this bastards?
Um.....
23 February, 21:47
Okay so let me get this straight. Techcrunch successfully trolled last.fm online? They got ratings and they get attention when the economy is going to hell and they “might” need the advertising?
Problem is. This crappy economy doesn’t excuse the fact that they trolled IRL users of the last.fm service got them to quit and hurt their image to prospective new users.
I’m I getting this?
If this is the case?
HOW ARE THEY GETTING AWAY WITH THIS?
Adele
23 February, 21:47
@james abusing data how exactly? And of course they’re fighting back, Techcrunch slandered them! Anyone else in last.fm’s position would do exactly the same.
deepthoughts
23 February, 21:49
I hope no one gives techcrunch an enema; it would create a superfund site.
Riddle
23 February, 21:58
Let me repost my comment from Digg addressed to anyone thinking that the RIAA could track one and one’s pirated album.
1. Take any album you have on your hard drive
2. Throw it into any music player available
3. Edit IDv3 tags
4. Scrobble it.
5. Be accused of playing pirated music.
6. Get any lawyer.
7. Profit.
vijay singh
23 February, 22:11
1. Only dumb asses would sue for libel in this case. Dumb because the damages don’t exist or are marginal, so what are you suing for? Principle? A bi-continental lawsuit would cost a million easy.
2. Libel is the written word, slander the spoken word. Internet stuff = Libel.
Luke
23 February, 22:35
Well done on the title. Techcrunch will do anything to get on social websites like Digg nowadays. I hope this response puts them in a new negative light.
G Padley
23 February, 22:48
Sorry but I am not sure that everything is known yet. Perhaps the UK team might see data mining jobs being run on their Hadoop cluster but who is to say what happens once they pass the data onto their american owners?
Matt
23 February, 23:09
TechCrunch has always been bullshit. Glad to see you guys fighting back against this.
John
23 February, 23:12
I used to visit TechCrunch a long time ago, still do on rare occasions when I’m bored bordering on comatose. After this charade I’ve deleted them from my bookmarks and won’t even visit their armpit of a site to check this whole situation out.
Nice plan TechCrunch but it’s backfired.
Anonymous
23 February, 23:40
It’s about time someone said they’re full of crap… and Michael is too high on coke!!
Link Building Blog
24 February, 00:10
Well glad to hear the rumors cleared up and it seems that this is linkbait at its finest!
Marc
24 February, 00:44
I ditched Tech Crunch 1 year ago or so. A bunch of cry babies there looking for add clicks.
Big Internet Marketing
24 February, 01:02
New U2 Album??
JHS
24 February, 01:06
yes linkbait and hype for U2 at the expense of last.fm (which I love and promote when I can) and the exposing of Techcrunch as shallow and of dubious value.
Eugene Foolstak
24 February, 02:13
You obviously didn’t pay TechCrunch enough to get favorable write-ups. Seriously, does anyone not know that TechCrunch follows the pay-to-play model?
Brandon Leedy
24 February, 02:48
Sorry I doubted you guys. I fell for the TechCrunch sensationalism. I’m back to scrobbling and its good to know where you all stand. Keep up the good work, honesty, and transparency. Next time, I’m coming to you guys first, not TechCrunch.
Free XBOX 360 Elite
24 February, 02:54
Frankly, if you have information about people who have stolen a U2 album, you have a moral obligation to provide it on request to U2’s representatives, whoever they may be.
This business of protecting people who do things that are morally wrong, solely on the basis that they deserve some kind of “privacy” when committing their unethical activity of choice, is itself unethical and amoral and makes matters considerably worse.
Now, it may well be that last.fm doesn’t have any information that would be helpful (doubtful, but possible), but I for one think that there is nothing whatsoever wrong with sharing it if you have it.
Guhmshoo
24 February, 03:04
Why Techcrunch screws up: http://bit.ly/oVNzf
Online Television
24 February, 03:09
TechCrunch has a habit of sensationalistic stories, I don’t blame them entirely but rather I think the author of the piece probably should be held accountable rather then the entire site.
Of course they should have editors that are more discerning of what gets published.
David Chartier
24 February, 03:12
I find it interesting that, despite 500+ comments, this story does not appear in TC’s front page “actively discussed stories” section in-line with all the blog posts.
Roger Moore
24 February, 03:58
NICE!
Say it with passion. This “Play Nice” shit is ruining the internet.
I think if someone accuses you of something on the internet that’s false you should be able to fly to their home town and choke them unconscious. (See the Joe Rogan uTube video)
And if you can prove it, they have to pay for the flight.
Babs
24 February, 04:35
heh, Marketing Pilgrim approve of Last.fm’s defence of their reputation:
http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2009/02/a-great-example-of-hosting-the-conversation-when-under-attack.html
“A Great Example of Hosting the Conversation When Under Attack
Here’s a great example of that, courtesy of Last.fm which found itself the victim of a “vicious and completely false rumour.” The music service tried what many companies try:
‘I denied it vehemently on the Techcrunch article, as did several other Last.fm staffers. We denied it in the Last.fm forums, on twitter, via email – basically we denied it to anyone that would listen, and now we’re denying it on our blog.’And, the “denying it on our blog” part is the best way to host the conversation. Instead of playing rumor “whack a mole” Last.fm’s blog post hit Techmeme, achieved 1177+ Diggs, dozens of comments, and positioned itself as the official response to the allegations.
Oh, and the title of the post? “Techcrunch are full of sh!t.” Not my normal style, but effective at bringing the conversation to their site, don’t you think? ;-) “
.
.
CLASS!!
Meanwhile, TechCrunch have buried the article from their front page, despite it being the most discussed with over 500 comments now. It disappeared from Google News on Saturday, within 12 hours of posting.
Moises Garcia
24 February, 04:52
You did right fighting back those pseudo-tech-bloggers. It makes no sense and seriously, I don´t give a shit about what RIAA knows about my music preferences..If i did I didn’t scrobble.
jeneane
24 February, 05:23
my bass are belong to ya’ll.
Nigel Leitch
24 February, 05:38
Does anyone listen to U2?
who cares
24 February, 05:51
? kklol play runescape
Steve Morgan
24 February, 06:16
It was written by Erick Schonfeld, or as I like to refer to him as “Captain Cut ‘n Paste” due to his obvious copying of other blogs content. He is clueless when it comes to technology and relies on second and third hand information, I saw him talk about jailbreaking the iPhone on TV and he got things completely wrong, he had no idea what he was talking about. I have seen this in a lot of his articles as well, he writes shit content with factual and spelling errors, then defends his false statements, not sure if he actually believes his overly inflated ego, or what his issue is. He actually does not appear to have any business experience himself, just a critic who really has no business talking about tech. Of course everyone kisses his ass in The Bay Area, but most think he is a douche.
Good job calling them on this, it takes balls to stand up to Tech Crunch, wish you guys the best and keep up the good work.
grapplica
24 February, 07:10
I’m with you man… if you stay true you will survive, no matter who you’re facing. Respect!
http://twitter.com/grapplica
Wash Echte
24 February, 07:13
Wow you’re still wearing a messy beard!
13hype
24 February, 07:57
those motherfuckers… last.fm FTW!
DevLano
24 February, 08:02
lol.
Jesse Evans
24 February, 08:15
Sue the
#$%#@$% !!Suggest we all tweet this !!!
pooflaps
24 February, 08:41
this is the only place where i can make these comments:
HEY DICKHEADS AT LAST.FM!!
ever heard of DIALUP???????
some of us still use it.
if you’re so wonderful how come you’re too fvcking STUPID to put a PAUSE button on your sample player??
i tried to listen to a song by taj mahal and all i got was uninteligible microsecond grabs from one end to the fvcking other!! THEN guess what happens!
it RESETS!
brilliant.
back to web school kiddies
oh and how about a contact form on the FRONT page.
you corporate pr1cks on the net these days are only interested in blurting on about yourselves. it’s quite obvious you’re not interested in your customers
rlaA
24 February, 09:10
Maybe U2’s record label, or even the RIAA, which btw, is an American music industry assocciation abiding by US law, paid/tempted/bribed Techscruch [pun intended :-)] to deliberately spread this false rumor to increase the new album’s exposure and therefore sales ?!?
I think, you think, therefore we are… thinking. ;)
Женское Белье
24 February, 09:33
I love U2!!!!!!!!1
Andy
24 February, 09:35
You got linked on daringfireball.net Good work!
What techcrunch have done stinks. It’s made even worse that they did it on a weekend when you couldn’t respond properly.
I hope you sue them for damages.
Still happy with my last.fm account here, and I don’t listen to U2.
“Make Bono History”
Jo
24 February, 09:39
@pooflaps you’ve obviously never heard of the forums….
perhaps you should go back to web school
Jonathan MacDonald
24 February, 09:45
Good work Richard and everyone else at Last.fm – blogged here:
http://www.jonathanmacdonald.com/?p=2825
James
24 February, 10:09
ever heard of DIALUP???????
WTF, you yanks need to roll with the times. No one makes web apps for the dial up generation.
Good post Last FM, viva la resistance
N3B
24 February, 10:23
No doubt Techcrunch have stripped the last of their credibility away BUT their article has made me look at last.fm in a way I’d never previously considered… I’ve foolishly been creating data for a wide range of people and organisations that if asked for, I never would have provided.
I’ve had a love of last.fm since 2005, but now the romance is over.
Anuta
24 February, 10:26
Riddle, you’re right!
None can prove nothing by scrobbled tracks log.
Even if they know, it’s from your IP, it does not mean, that you indeed listen to the songs scrobbled.
Jon Heller
24 February, 11:02
Where is that offiice Watch-Moose anyway???
alastair
24 February, 11:14
@Babs:
It isn’t the same as listening to a song at your friends house, because in that case you wouldn’t come away with a copy that you could play again and again.
And it isn’t the same as the situation with tapes, firstly because casual distribution of tapes (a) isn’t very fast, (b) you only have so many friends to whom you’ll give copies of your music on tape, and © copies of copies have lower sound quality, which also limits distribution. Copyright holders may disapprove of taping, but at the end of the day it doesn’t hurt their sales nearly as much as on-line distribution does.
Danny
24 February, 11:23
Those damn rumor mongers!
Luke's Beard
24 February, 11:40
eat shit tech crunch , i love you last.fm
Peter
24 February, 11:47
Rumours again…
Here’s a good illustration on how it actually happens: http://blog.blogupp.com/2009/01/so-whats-fuss-about.html
TechCrunched
24 February, 11:49
Death to TechCrunch!
I was a reader of TechCrunch before. But with their unprofessional and showbiz like reporting, I unsubscribed to their feed.
Dawson
24 February, 13:02
I have also unsubscribed from TC, they’re editorial has been going down the pan for ages and this just broke it for me.
PistolPete
24 February, 13:11
pooflaps you are a complete and utter degenerate twat. Dial up, lord have mercy.
Well done for kicking back last.fm, keep up the good work!
Supporter
24 February, 13:29
I like how this post is already the top-4 of Google’s search for “full of shit” (http://www.google.de/search?q=“full+of+shit”). Now, can we point this to Techcrunch directly. Which is not a Google Bomb, but simply the truth – I heard at least.
Rafal Los
24 February, 13:57
Desperate times call for desperate fake news? Way to go TechDouches
Unknown2
24 February, 15:19
I love you guys. Last.fm rocks
Mike
24 February, 16:33
Last.fm… Why don’t you just delete the IP tag against each scrobble? Maybe after say 10 of them?
Or do a one-way-hash of it (with a say, 4 digit result, making it impossible to stand up in court)… and tag that against each scrobble. Then if an account gets compromised, provide the user with a mechanism of grouping scrobbles against this hash, and batch nuking them from their database.
The account could then be flaggable /unflaggable as “compromised” by the user, commencing IP logging to track the malicious user should he/she return, possibly with a “ignore this IP range” facility.
kevin
24 February, 16:39
is sad to see how rumors can spread so easily.
StandardPixel
24 February, 16:42
Thanks for letting us know and keep up the great work!
Babs
24 February, 17:09
@ alastair – it IS the same. The only complaint I’m getting from you is numbers, reach.
The reason why I say it’s the same is because any copy is never a patch on the original. Even if you burn a one-off copy at your friend’s house, that copy, that burnt CD, will have a shelf-life of what? 5 years? 10 at the max. In that time, it will deteriorate. Same with cassettes (although if you look after them, they can surprise you, I have some going back to the early 80s. And actually, if you use ferrous cassettes, C90s, sound quality is excellent. It’s analogue so of course it’s going to be. ).
If a fan loves a body of work, they will buy it. And now with full disclosure of music readily available, there is no need to “buy blind”. So when we buy something, we already know we’re going to treasure it. Not all of us have the money to waste on CDs we might go off in 6-12 months’ time. I keep all my purchases and care for them. Most people I know do.
The other thing is, (I don’t know where you live) but here in the UK, they can’t GIVE music away. I find myself groaning when I find yet another CD free with my weekend papers. How many coasters does a person need and should I be designing wall features? I have CDs coming out of my ears, music I don’t want. I don’t want yet more clutter. We have far more music demanding our attention today than we ever did before. Streaming/downloading allows us to try before we buy. Another thing, the vast majority of CD releases are pretty much crap to average, let’s face it. Great releases are few and far between and well worth the money – why? because good music looks after you, cares for your soul and provides a soundtrack to your life. They’re the albums you update in new formats as technology improves. Basically, buy again!
The bottom line is: if ‘they’ want our money, show us the goods first. Doesn’t matter how. Can’t say fairer than that.
Mike
24 February, 17:57
I love you guys !
Long life to lastfm !
LASTFM
24 February, 19:54
I don’t know why ANYONE would sign up for this service: get spyware installed on your computer that sends information about what you are doing to a company who will use it for profit. And now that they are owned by a public company, CBS, last.fm have a duty to the shareholders to realize as much profit as possible.
Lest you think that you are the customer of last.fm when you install their software:
Customers: companies who pay cash to collect aggregated listening data, and advertisers.
Product: Listener’s profiles and listening data
excerpts from the ‘privacy (invasion) policy’:
“If you choose to download the Last.fm software, it will monitor all the music you listen to on your computer (even if you are not online). It will then send this information to Last.fm…
we may share your information with our affiliates, service providers and other third parties that provide products or services for or through this Website or for our business (such as Web site or database hosting companies, address list hosting companies, e-mail service providers, analytics companies, distribution companies, fulfillment companies, and other similar service providers that use such information on our behalf).
Certain third party individuals or organisations may have access to your personal information (excluding your email contact information) via Last.fm’s API and webservices or as a result of agreements between Last.fm and its preferred partners. (However, you should be aware that if you provide your e-mail contact information and/or username directly to any such third parties, they may use your information for their own purposes.) Such partners may use such information for their own purposes, which may be either commercial or non-commercial in nature and which may include targeted advertising or direct marketing. These third parties may be based in the United Kingdom or elsewhere (including outside of the EEA).
…Last.fm cannot guarantee that all third parties will abide by such restrictions. “
—-
The ONLY thing last.fm agrees not to sell or share is your email address (although with your IP address and web cookies from the major advertisers, that can figure that out pretty quick, but they don’t need that in order to send a John Doe infringement notice to the ISP), and you agree not to sue after anything you post to the website or that has been harvested from your computer is sold to third parties, in foreign countries.
Oh, and CBS Records IS a member of the RIAA. Your listening habits are now the property of an RIAA member.
The privacy agreement basically says that your complete information profile (with only your email address removed) and every song you listen to online or off and every web page you view on the website can be sold in perpetuity. No restrictions. And consider that the privacy agreement only pertains to what is shared with third-parties: CBS corporation might not consider the RIAA a third party.
Lip service saying that the IP address isn’t shared or saying ‘this is what the record manager would see’, ‘we value your privacy’ is quaint but useless. The privacy policy says if last.fm decides to sell (or give away, or share, or release) a per-customer breakdown of every song listened to since the beginning of data collection, that’s fine.
Babs
24 February, 20:26
“I don’t know why ANYONE would sign up for this service:…”
so what are you doing here then?
Andreas
24 February, 21:05
Just deleted my TC rss feed subscription and i’m feeling good! :-)
Jo
24 February, 23:03
‘The privacy agreement basically says that your complete information profile (with only your email address removed) and every song you listen to online or off and every web page you view on the website can be sold in perpetuity’
And what benefit would that be exactly seeing as how anyone on the web can go to a profile and see exactly which user has scrobbled what?
Kittichan
24 February, 23:08
I’m gladful to hear that. I couldn’t believe it myself.
Petfoodz.Info
24 February, 23:52
Noted..
Leoplurodon
24 February, 23:59
I was pretty sure the whole thing smelt distinctly of bullshit. :-)
Leon Ridge-Cooke
25 February, 06:48
Thanks for clearing this up.
Matches Malone
25 February, 10:53
Always good when you can call @TechCrunch out on his BS….
Daryn St. Pierre
25 February, 13:56
Re-Tweeted as well. I hate when such rumors are spread with absolutely no backing, especially on a website that a lot of people would consider a reputable source of tech information. What a shame. Regardless, the Last.fm users know the truth.
Aside from that, I’m not a fan of how U2 seems to be ‘marketing’ their new album, nor am I really a fan of them to begin with. But that’s beside the point.
Smuggler
26 February, 20:07
“I don’t know why ANYONE would sign up for this service”
Maybe because it made me discover bands that I never would have known otherwise?
Jack Broun
28 February, 20:47
Thanks for clearing!!!
Alan J Castonguay
1 March, 22:39
To be fair, some people scrobble under their real name, and as such their identity and contact information is publicly visible on the plays page. But I haven’t really listened to U2 since The Joshua Tree so shrug.
I would like the hCard to actually contain ‘n’, rather than relying upon ‘fn’.
2Serenity
2 March, 02:22
This is why I adore last.fm and that is brutal honesty from everyone. I saw that rumor spread all over the internet, and I did not believe it at all not knowing anything. This is why having your own space to clear up the rumors is essential. Thank you for sharing!
george
2 March, 12:28
techcrunch is full of shit. has been proven 1000 times.
Spazure
3 March, 00:03
Retweeted! I <3 you LastFM!
ernesto
3 March, 22:34
i hope it is true what last.fm said, otherwise they would have lost my trust in them completely!
Marlon
4 March, 00:44
Well, my doubt is: Do you store this information (email and IP) and if so, how do you respond to a subpoena requesting this data? Do you simply deny it?
Whosoever
4 March, 06:39
TechCrunch, lol.
That half nerdy tabloid where Michael Arrington projects himself as if it should have been named Michaelcrunch.com?
And again, when he goes for an outing, he says I am going for a break and 50 people say good bye MA and when he comes back he again writes a post and 50 people say welcome back MA.
Do we call it a technology site?
ioffersearch001
4 March, 12:02
Still we are believing last.fm, and its for all the users. No one can stop its service.
Its being used my more peoples.
If you need any technology oriented blogs you can try here : http://ioffersearch.com/
Thanks,
<a href=“http://ioffersearch.com”>Ioffersearch.com Blogs – Just another Ioffersearch.com weblog</a>
amidj
5 March, 11:51
Look this ! It’s interressant :-)
—-
Last.fm and the Diabolical Power of Data Mining
—-
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/02/last-fm-and-the-diabolical-power-of-data-mining
Amber
9 March, 00:58
With all of this inaccurate information being broadcast across the blogosphere as truth, is it any wonder that bloggers are NOT taken seriously as journalists?? (see http://www.webpronews.com/topnews/2009/02/27/house-says-bloggers-dont-count-as-journalists).
As of late there has been allot of talk into the legitimacy of blog posts and believability of their sources.
When so-called “professional” blogs and their authors post such slanderous claims —- it effects everyone involved in the blogosphere from the struggling newbie to the very top of the blog chain ((which so many bloggers work towards becoming)), hurting the quest to be taken seriously.
It is really too bad that TC has assumed that posting a breaking story to a mass of people without evidence is o.k and warrants no further investigation.
Kudos to Lastfm for taking a stand.
Amber
(http://www.last.fm/user/abstract2)
Roland
17 March, 23:52
Hey guys I just read this and was utterly disgusted, especially because TC refused to retract or apologize for the story. I made a post on my blog pointing people here and advocated avoiding TC. Just my little way of saying thanks to Last.fm for an awesome service
Roland
18 March, 02:03
Hey I sent them an email saying they should apologize or at least retract the story. That guy Michael replied and claims it’s “quite true”.
Bjorn Stromberg
25 March, 17:38
Your users supported you when TechCrunch attacked you, and one month later you stab us in the back. You guys really can’t be trusted.
psychoalgie
4 April, 09:44
I’m very happy to read this. I didn’t believe TechCrunch anyway.
Comments are closed for this entry.