Spotify’s June chart dispute has moved into prediction markets after fake streams lifted Malcolm Todd’s “Earrings” into a winning position. Kalshi used earlier chart figures to settle a $3 million market before the streaming service finished its review. The case now centers on Spotify’s data, Kalshi’s process, and trader claims over a disputed result.
Several media reports say Spotify asked Kalshi and Polymarket to remove its logo from their market pages. It also asked both companies to clarify that neither operates a partnership with the streaming service. The request followed an internal finding of alleged artificial activity linked to music-chart markets.
Reports claim Spotify removed more than 500,000 fake streams from Todd’s song. Those plays had pushed “Earrings” toward the top of U.S. streaming charts. However, Kalshi had already used earlier figures to settle its June chart contract.
The market asked traders to predict the most streamed song in the United States for June. It attracted $3 million in trading before the dispute became public. Todd appeared among the winners before Spotify completed its investigation and removed the artificial plays.
Kalshi reviews settlement after Spotify contact
Kalshi said it had started reviewing the disputed result after contact with Spotify.
“We’re in touch with Spotify and are actively investigating this matter,” spokesperson Elisabeth Diana said.
Spotify contacted both platforms after identifying the issue in its June chart data. It asked them to stop using its logo in ways that could imply endorsement. It also sought clearer language showing that no commercial partnership exists.
The dispute has placed settlement rules under sharper focus because markets often depend on outside data. In this case, traders relied on published chart figures before later stream removals changed the outcome. Therefore, the timing of settlement has become central to complaints from affected users.
Trader losses highlight wider market data risks
Caleb Davies, a prominent trader in music-chart markets, criticized Kalshi after the suspicious activity surfaced. He said the platform failed to act directly when he raised concerns. He also accused it of seeking plausible deniability instead of protecting traders.
“I’m a huge Kalshi fan and would even say cheerleader at times,” Davies said. He added that Kalshi avoided “addressing a real issue head on” after he flagged the matter. Davies said he lost $4,500 after artificial streams pushed Todd into the lead.
Before the activity, Kalshi odds gave Todd less than a 3% chance of winning. Buyers at that level stood to earn about 30 times their stakes. The payout profile increased scrutiny of how markets handle late corrections to source data across future disputed music contracts. The case also showed how prediction contracts can create incentives to influence outside data sources.
A think tank employee previously edited a Russia-Ukraine war map used for a Polymarket bet. French authorities also examined possible weather-station tampering tied to a Paris temperature market. Such cases show why settlement sources face more pressure from traders and platform operators.
Artificial streaming has affected music services for years because it can inflate royalties and rankings.
“All streaming services face ever-changing stream manipulation,” a company spokesperson told Bloomberg.
However, Spotify said it uses detection tools and does not pay royalties on manipulated streams.
