The post Can The Music Industry Grow From The Drake/UMG Saga? appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Drake’s lawsuit was written off by many as his inability to handle the fallout of a rap battle he initiated, but could it be catalyst for long overdue change in the industry? Getty Images Many music fans dismissed Drake’s lawsuit as an inability to handle the fallout of a rap battle he initiated – but his claims go far beyond defamation. This dispute isn’t just about clout. It’s an opportunity to rethink who controls access, visibility, and narrative power in the streaming era. And for independent artists, the outcome could shape the future of fair competition in music. Beyond the “Headlines”: Reforming the Law Beyond the headlines, Drake’s lawsuit could catalyze overdue legal scrutiny of digital-era misconduct, from streaming fraud and bot-driven royalties to modern payola practices hidden behind algorithmic promotion. If streaming manipulation is deemed a potential RICO violation, it could open the door to novel legal claims by artists who believe they’ve been suppressed, making this case one to watch closely. Drake’s case is not the only example of industry probes on the issues of the new age of streaming. In September 2024, the Department of Justice announced its arrest of musician Michael Smith in the first-ever criminal case involving artificially inflated music streaming – a fringe actor who used A.I. to generate songs and bots to inflate royalties, earning over $10 million. Smith allegedly used artificial intelligence to create songs and then employed automated bots to stream these tracks, generating over $10 million in royalties. He faces trial on the grounds of wire fraud and money laundering. The artificial inflation of music streams is a deep-seated issue across the music industry, extending far deeper than the Drake case. NurPhoto via Getty Images While Smith’s case involves fraud at the individual level as opposed to practices of big… The post Can The Music Industry Grow From The Drake/UMG Saga? appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Drake’s lawsuit was written off by many as his inability to handle the fallout of a rap battle he initiated, but could it be catalyst for long overdue change in the industry? Getty Images Many music fans dismissed Drake’s lawsuit as an inability to handle the fallout of a rap battle he initiated – but his claims go far beyond defamation. This dispute isn’t just about clout. It’s an opportunity to rethink who controls access, visibility, and narrative power in the streaming era. And for independent artists, the outcome could shape the future of fair competition in music. Beyond the “Headlines”: Reforming the Law Beyond the headlines, Drake’s lawsuit could catalyze overdue legal scrutiny of digital-era misconduct, from streaming fraud and bot-driven royalties to modern payola practices hidden behind algorithmic promotion. If streaming manipulation is deemed a potential RICO violation, it could open the door to novel legal claims by artists who believe they’ve been suppressed, making this case one to watch closely. Drake’s case is not the only example of industry probes on the issues of the new age of streaming. In September 2024, the Department of Justice announced its arrest of musician Michael Smith in the first-ever criminal case involving artificially inflated music streaming – a fringe actor who used A.I. to generate songs and bots to inflate royalties, earning over $10 million. Smith allegedly used artificial intelligence to create songs and then employed automated bots to stream these tracks, generating over $10 million in royalties. He faces trial on the grounds of wire fraud and money laundering. The artificial inflation of music streams is a deep-seated issue across the music industry, extending far deeper than the Drake case. NurPhoto via Getty Images While Smith’s case involves fraud at the individual level as opposed to practices of big…

Can The Music Industry Grow From The Drake/UMG Saga?

Drake’s lawsuit was written off by many as his inability to handle the fallout of a rap battle he initiated, but could it be catalyst for long overdue change in the industry?

Getty Images

Many music fans dismissed Drake’s lawsuit as an inability to handle the fallout of a rap battle he initiated – but his claims go far beyond defamation. This dispute isn’t just about clout. It’s an opportunity to rethink who controls access, visibility, and narrative power in the streaming era. And for independent artists, the outcome could shape the future of fair competition in music.

Beyond the “Headlines”: Reforming the Law

Beyond the headlines, Drake’s lawsuit could catalyze overdue legal scrutiny of digital-era misconduct, from streaming fraud and bot-driven royalties to modern payola practices hidden behind algorithmic promotion. If streaming manipulation is deemed a potential RICO violation, it could open the door to novel legal claims by artists who believe they’ve been suppressed, making this case one to watch closely.

Drake’s case is not the only example of industry probes on the issues of the new age of streaming. In September 2024, the Department of Justice announced its arrest of musician Michael Smith in the first-ever criminal case involving artificially inflated music streaming – a fringe actor who used A.I. to generate songs and bots to inflate royalties, earning over $10 million. Smith allegedly used artificial intelligence to create songs and then employed automated bots to stream these tracks, generating over $10 million in royalties. He faces trial on the grounds of wire fraud and money laundering.

The artificial inflation of music streams is a deep-seated issue across the music industry, extending far deeper than the Drake case.

NurPhoto via Getty Images

While Smith’s case involves fraud at the individual level as opposed to practices of big labels, it is equally vital in the regulation of the new frontier of digital music. Taken together, these cases highlight the regulatory vacuum in streaming and may help shape the first real precedents for digital-era enforcement.

If the court entertains Drake’s allegations in full, the resulting legal framework could empower independent artists to:

  • Investigate and challenge artificially inflated streams that distort fair competition.
  • Demand more transparency from DSPs and labels regarding playlist inclusion and algorithmic promotions.
  • Hold platforms and major labels accountable for suppression tactics that disadvantage independent musicians.

Drake’s lawsuit doesn’t explicitly challenge industry consolidation, but its subtext raises real questions about how much power is concentrated in the hands of a few global players. Given the DOJ’s increasing interest in platform dominance across sectors, it wouldn’t be surprising to see scrutiny extend to major labels, especially if suppression claims become more widespread.

Creating Fairness in a “GREEDY” System:

Gone are the days of iTunes downloads. With artists now relying on streaming metrics, the industry must demand more transparency from DSPs and labels.

Getty Images

Fixing this imbalance will require coordinated action from independent artists, managers, and legal advocates alike, including calls for:

  • Stronger audit rights in contracts to allow artists and labels to verify streaming data.
  • Greater transparency in algorithmic recommendations.
  • A legal framework for challenging algorithmic suppression, enabling artists to fight back.
  • Legislative or industry-led oversight mechanisms to prevent DSPs from favoring major-label-backed tracks over independent releases through undisclosed deals.

Drake’s case could help define how DSPs and major labels interact with artists going forward and whether independent creators can expect fairer treatment in the digital age. While the outcome remains unknown, there are a few steps these artists can take to protect themselves:

  • Monitor streaming data closely: Use analytics tools like Spotify for Artists, Chartmetric, and third-party verification services to track irregularities.
  • Negotiate contractual transparency: When signing with distributors, labels, or marketing agencies, demand clear audit rights and accountability measures.
  • Leverage legal counsel early: Before agreeing to any streaming promotion services or playlist pitching deals, consult a knowledgeable music attorney to ensure transparency and fairness.
  • Advocate for policy changes: Join industry organizations pushing for more equitable streaming policies, such as algorithmic transparency.

Drake may have taken a loss in the rap battle, but in taking the fight to court, he may help win the war for artist accountability.

Legal Entertainment has reached out to representation for comment, and will update this story as necessary.

Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/legalentertainment/2025/09/03/can-the-music-industry-grow-from-the-drakeumg-saga/

Market Opportunity
Threshold Logo
Threshold Price(T)
$0.010034
$0.010034$0.010034
-1.20%
USD
Threshold (T) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

Gold Hits $3,700 as Sprott’s Wong Says Dollar’s Store-of-Value Crown May Slip

Gold Hits $3,700 as Sprott’s Wong Says Dollar’s Store-of-Value Crown May Slip

The post Gold Hits $3,700 as Sprott’s Wong Says Dollar’s Store-of-Value Crown May Slip appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Gold is strutting its way into record territory, smashing through $3,700 an ounce Wednesday morning, as Sprott Asset Management strategist Paul Wong says the yellow metal may finally snatch the dollar’s most coveted role: store of value. Wong Warns: Fiscal Dominance Puts U.S. Dollar on Notice, Gold on Top Gold prices eased slightly to $3,678.9 […] Source: https://news.bitcoin.com/gold-hits-3700-as-sprotts-wong-says-dollars-store-of-value-crown-may-slip/
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 00:33
Why Institutional Capital Chooses Gold Over Bitcoin Amid Yen Currency Crisis

Why Institutional Capital Chooses Gold Over Bitcoin Amid Yen Currency Crisis

TLDR: Yen’s managed devaluation artificially strengthens the dollar, creating headwinds for Bitcoin price action. Gold has surged 61.4% while Bitcoin stagnates
Share
Blockonomi2026/01/18 12:09
Franklin Templeton CEO Dismisses 50bps Rate Cut Ahead FOMC

Franklin Templeton CEO Dismisses 50bps Rate Cut Ahead FOMC

The post Franklin Templeton CEO Dismisses 50bps Rate Cut Ahead FOMC appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Franklin Templeton CEO Jenny Johnson has weighed in on whether the Federal Reserve should make a 25 basis points (bps) Fed rate cut or 50 bps cut. This comes ahead of the Fed decision today at today’s FOMC meeting, with the market pricing in a 25 bps cut. Bitcoin and the broader crypto market are currently trading flat ahead of the rate cut decision. Franklin Templeton CEO Weighs In On Potential FOMC Decision In a CNBC interview, Jenny Johnson said that she expects the Fed to make a 25 bps cut today instead of a 50 bps cut. She acknowledged the jobs data, which suggested that the labor market is weakening. However, she noted that this data is backward-looking, indicating that it doesn’t show the current state of the economy. She alluded to the wage growth, which she remarked is an indication of a robust labor market. She added that retail sales are up and that consumers are still spending, despite inflation being sticky at 3%, which makes a case for why the FOMC should opt against a 50-basis-point Fed rate cut. In line with this, the Franklin Templeton CEO said that she would go with a 25 bps rate cut if she were Jerome Powell. She remarked that the Fed still has the October and December FOMC meetings to make further cuts if the incoming data warrants it. Johnson also asserted that the data show a robust economy. However, she noted that there can’t be an argument for no Fed rate cut since Powell already signaled at Jackson Hole that they were likely to lower interest rates at this meeting due to concerns over a weakening labor market. Notably, her comment comes as experts argue for both sides on why the Fed should make a 25 bps cut or…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 00:36