Quick wins for a faster PC:
Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →That striking claim came from a lawsuit, not a proven finding. Rapper RBX alleged that some Spotify accounts streamed Drake’s music for as much as 23 hours a day as part of a wider scheme involving artificial streams. Drake was not sued or accused of organizing the activity, and a judge later dismissed the original complaint without deciding whether the streaming allegations were true.
What the 23-hour claim means
RBX, whose legal name is Eric Dwayne Collins, filed a proposed class action against Spotify on November 2, 2025, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. The complaint alleged that automated accounts and other artificial activity inflated play counts and diverted streaming revenue from other rights holders. It cited Drake’s catalog as one example, claiming that a large number of accounts listened exclusively to Drake for “23 hours a day.” Ars Technica and Pitchfork reported that the filing did not explain in detail how the analysis behind the claim was conducted.
| # | Preview | Product | Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
|
$ome $exy $ongs 4 U | $39.98 | Buy on Amazon |
| 2 |
|
Drake - Take Care | $34.70 | Buy on Amazon |
| 3 |
|
Drake - If You're Reading This It's Too Late | $61.99 | Buy on Amazon |
| 4 |
|
Drake - Scorpion | $60.99 | Buy on Amazon |
| 5 |
![Bryter Layter [LP]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51jV0coH9OL._SL160_.jpg)
|
Bryter Layter [LP] | $28.64 | Buy on Amazon |
The complaint presented its claims on information and belief. No independent statistical study validating the 23-hour assertion is identified in the reporting cited here, and the claim was not established by a court. It should therefore be read as RBX’s allegation, not as evidence that real listeners did this or that Drake arranged fake streams.
What else the complaint alleged
The original complaint alleged that a “substantial, non-trivial percentage” of approximately 37 billion Drake streams from January 2022 through September 2025 were inauthentic. It also claimed that at least 250,000 streams of “No Face” over a four-day period in 2024 originated in Turkey but were mapped to the United Kingdom through VPN use. These figures and the description of the traffic are allegations in the filing, not judicial findings. Ars Technica and Pitchfork covered the claims.
#1 Best Overall
- Released: 05/09/2025
- Format: Vinyl
The complaint’s proposed harm was financial: if artificial plays inflate an artist’s share of total streams, other rights holders may receive a smaller proportional share of a limited royalty pool. RBX’s original filing estimated losses of hundreds of millions of dollars, but that was a claimed estimate, not an awarded or adjudicated damages figure. Ars Technica and Pitchfork reported that estimate.
Was Drake sued?
No. The defendant in the case was Spotify. Drake appeared as an example in RBX’s allegations about streaming activity; the complaint did not accuse him of personally arranging fraudulent streams. The distinction matters: a claim about plays attributed to an artist’s catalog is not, by itself, proof that the artist caused or knew about any alleged manipulation.
Rank #2
- Drake
- Take Care
How Spotify responded
Spotify denied benefiting from artificial streaming. A spokesperson said, “Spotify in no way benefits from the industry-wide challenge of artificial streaming.” The company also said it uses measures including removing fake streams, withholding royalties and charging penalties. Those remarks describe Spotify’s stated position and practices; they are not independent proof of how effective its systems are. Ars Technica
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.What happened to the lawsuit
Original complaint dismissed
On June 22, 2026, Judge Josephine L. Staton dismissed the original complaint. Reporting on the ruling says the judge found RBX had not plausibly alleged why the harm he suffered outweighed Spotify’s justification for its policies, and questioned the alleged financial impact on RBX and the complaint’s focus on a single artist. The court’s reported rationale included: “Plaintiff has failed to plausibly allege that the harm he has suffered outweighs any justification Spotify may have for maintaining its current policies regarding artificial streaming.” Complex
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
Rank #3
- Drake
- If You're Reading This It's Too Late
That was a decision about whether the original pleading sufficiently stated a claim. It was not a trial verdict establishing that the alleged streams were fake—or that they were genuine.
Amended complaint reported
Music Business Worldwide reported that RBX filed an amended complaint on July 13, 2026. The new filing was reported to frame the allegations as platform-wide and to claim at least $600 million in diverted royalties. Those are claims attributed to the amended complaint, not proven losses. Music Business Worldwide
Rank #4
- Drake
- Scorpion
A docket index lists filings in August and September 2026 but warns that it may not show the complete case history. On the information available here, it is not possible to establish whether the amended case remains active or has ended. PACERMonitor docket index
Quick Recap
Best Value
- Nick Drake's sophomore album, Bryter Layter, was originally released in 1970 on Island Records
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
