RINGTONE RECORDS 26

MUSIC INDUSTRY COMMENTARY · RINGTONE RECORDS 26

Is Spotify Too Big to Fail?

Streaming fraud has become an accepted reality of Spotify's business model, a problem so deeply embedded in the system that its consequences are routinely swept under the rug. Artificial streams can imitate legitimate listening so convincingly that distinguishing fraud from genuine activity is often extraordinarily difficult, leaving honest artists exposed while billions of plays determine who gets paid. The industry's willingness to tolerate this vulnerability has allowed Spotify's continued operation to be treated as inevitable rather than conditional on its ability to protect the marketplace. The harsh reality is that a company unable to adequately police its own platform should face the possibility of losing its right to operate in the United States.

← Back to Archive
Illuminated Spotify marquee asking “Is Spotify Too Big to Fail?” above a New York style city street.
Is Spotify Too Big to Fail? Streaming fraud and accountability in the music industry.

Spotify Wasn't Always Welcome

Sweden's Spotify wasn't always considered indispensable. When it launched in the United States in 2011, its future depended on licensing agreements with a skeptical recording industry. Today, the same industry treats Spotify as permanent infrastructure, despite the unresolved vulnerabilities of its streaming model.

Major Labels Always Find a Way to Hold Power

Major record labels have substantial influence over Spotify through licensing agreements and financial relationships. In Spotify's early years, even major artists did not routinely debut with the massive streaming numbers seen today. Over time, those figures grew dramatically, raising concerns that the industry's biggest players figured out how to game the system. The problem is that even Spotify may be unable to reliably distinguish fraudulent streams from legitimate ones, making manipulation difficult to detect or prove.

Smaller Artists Pay the Price

While massive streaming numbers generate the largest royalty payments, Spotify's 1,000 annual stream threshold excludes recordings that fail to reach that number from recorded music royalty payments. Smaller artists bear the consequences of a system that struggles to identify fraudulent activity while denying payment for legitimate streams.

Congress Steps In

On October 7, 2026, the U.S. Copyright Office opened an inquiry into music streaming fraud following congressional interest. The investigation addresses artificial streaming, royalty manipulation, and the difficulty of protecting legitimate artists. The problem has become serious enough for federal scrutiny, yet Spotify continues operating under a model in which fraudulent activity can be extraordinarily difficult to distinguish from genuine listening.

Spotify Can Be Replaced

Spotify is not the only streaming service. Apple Music, Amazon Music, YouTube Music, and others provide alternatives. Its dominance should not protect it from consequences when it cannot adequately police its own platform. The American music industry existed before Spotify and can continue without it. If Spotify cannot protect artists from fraud, losing access to the American market should be a real possibility. Removing Spotify should be on the table as we move forward in this industry, and players who can show that they prevent theft should take its place.

← Back to Archive