Recent news revealed that Spotify’s CEO Daniel Ek has been investing heavily in military tech companies, which adds another ethical layer to a platform already criticized for how little it pays musicians !
Spotify only pays artists about $3–5 per 1,000 streams, using a pro-rata model that directs most money toward major stars... By contrast, Qobuz (≈$18–20 per 1,000 streams) and Tidal (≈$12–13) pay far more fairly!
However Tidal is far from ethical. Most of its revenue is controlled by private investors and founders and small artists still earn very little...
More fair-minded platforms like Bandcamp, Resonate, Ampled, or SoundCloud’s fan-powered royalties prioritize musicians over investors.
With these more ethical alternatives available, why do we keep using Spotify?
Stealing means change of ownership.
You are not stealing music.
Call it whatever you want, you don't have rights to get it unless its through a legal way.
It is legal to download music from P2P networks where I live. Whether it's ethical has always been a different argument, but it really only has to be MORE ethical than using Spotify.
OK, so fix the tax code to the extent that corporations are actually the main funder of the government (since they're the only constituents with any power) and pay me a living wage, and I'll ... oh, no, wait. The vast majority of my purchase doesn't go to the artist?
"Rights" are for the rich.