Let's say you're a youtuber or streamer who listens to a variety of different music, are you really going to pay to license every one of your favorite songs for business use? No.
Instead they go to No Copyright Sounds or Kevin McLeod and grab their stuff instead because why are you going to sacrifice that money to license the music when you're small and starting out?
When streamers are streaming, they are working. If you want to listen to your favorite music, you can do that in your own private time. In a business context, other rules apply.
> why are you going to sacrifice that money to license the music when you're small and starting out
Does this also apply to utility bills?
Just use non-copyrighted music. If that isn't enough, you need to pay or just live with it.
The original post talked about this causing a lack of discovery for the new music. If the streamer doesn't pay and just uses non-copyrighted music no harm done to the streamer. It's still great fun. But the users don't get exposed to potentially interesting music content.
Why should the streamer pay for the privilege of being basically an advertisement platform for a commercial product? And they don't, and thus there is less discovery. Hence what is meant by the music industry shooting itself in the foot.
I personally listen mostly to music I listened as a teenager and early 20's. Sometimes I learn of something new and nice from my friends, but otherwise I find discovering new music quite hard.
A new game comes out: Tons of reviews and letsplays and whatnot. Looks interesting, I'll buy. New music comes out: Its advertised maybe in Spotify but that's it. Making a review or analysis is not possible (without paying extra), so I can't encounter it. And thus I won't listen it.
You are assuming that no copyright content is not interesting. That's often the case, but this is a chance for artists who don't subscribe to the exploitative model offered by most labels. People discover new music just fine, only that it doesn't come from greedy labels.
If people could cut costs by using electricity that isn't from their local state monopoly then definitely.
\>Just use non-copyrighted music. If that isn't enough, you need to pay or just live with it.
The original post is complaining about a lack of discovery, and you don't seem to care about finding any sort of solution to the problem originally posed.
No one's going to pay to advertise your crap, thus no one is going to listen to it.
I think it's the start of one of the major trends of our new era. I predict that universities are going to drop HASS and bring in more trades programs. If that were to happen I wouldn't mind having them receive public funding.
Proposition 13, which arguably had a hand in creating the housing problem that exists there today (alongside neighborhood efforts to pause any new housing development, something Austin is facing as well) was championed mostly by Howard Jarvis and Paul Gann, both of whom were conservative.
Anecdotal, but everyone I know who left California recently did so due to the high cost of housing, not because of their tax liabilities or a plastic straw ban. Kinda hard to be upset about having to give 9% of your income to the state when you have to give 50% if your income to the landlord (for an 80 year old, 350 sq ft studio heated by radiator in my case when I lived there).
yes? you see people like yang advocating for things like UBI, and others like ocasio-cortez wanting similar programs along with other big spending programs like getting rid of student debt and free college.
OK? Yang is hardly a democrat and he is not in any position of power. Nothing you are saying is actually backing up what you are claiming. Quite the contrary, these are examples of democrats who have been pushed away from power because of their ideas. How many delegates did Yang get again?
Ocasio-Cortez is one congress woman who has been in office for less than two years. She is not in a position of power within the democratic party, in fact they actively oppose her.
So what is your point? AOC does not reflect where the democrats are as a party, and it's dishonest to pretend so.
And student loan relief is not socialism. Free college could arguably be, but what is being discussed is far from free college.
