Attorneys for Michael Smith, who generated millions of dollars by mass-uploading AI-generated songs and driving billions of plays, are asking a federal judge for probation rather than prison. They argue his conduct had a minimal effect on real artists’ royalties.
The defense argument
In a sentencing memorandum filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, Smith’s lawyers say his actions caused only “tiny, immeasurable losses” spread across millions of songwriters and artists. They also argue that large corporate entities engage in streaming fraud at a systemic level, so sentencing one man will do little to address the wider problem.
“The effect each individual stream has on every other artist’s share of the total streaming pool is not akin to a drop in the proverbial bucket, it is a drop in an ocean. Accordingly, no individual artist or songwriter suffered any perceptible harm from Mr. Smith’s conduct,” the filing asserts.
The lawyers ask the court to weigh Smith’s lack of a criminal record, his history of good deeds and the effect a two-year prison term would have on his family.
Where the case stands
Smith pleaded guilty in March to one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud, which carries a maximum sentence of five years. He was also required to pay more than $8 million in restitution. Federal sentencing guidelines call for 46 to 57 months in his case, while the US Probation Office’s presentence report recommended a shorter term of 24 months.
Sentencing was expected in July, but it has not taken place and no new date appears on the public docket. The outcome will set a precedent as the first US sentence for AI-assisted streaming fraud.
