You're grossly misquoting Rose, as harvey9 also pointed out. Noone suggested "just because [musicians] create [doesn't] obligate people to consume". They're criticizing the compensation rate for lesser-known artists on streaming.

How is this that much different to criticizing the cut that a dominant distributor takes from vendors in e-commerce or video games?

Indeed, very strong "One fish turns to another and asks, What is water?" vibes.

Even if you exclude all the discoverability functionality, just the pure distribution aspect, at this scale, makes the Spotify system impressive. Why should that system and all the work that went into it, be free?

I don't think there are any legal barriers for someone to go ahead and build their own music distribution system that is more fair than Spotify. It's just a matter of putting in the time, no?

It's also kind of dismissive of the entire FOSS ecosystem which basically runs on hearts and souls you can git clone for free.

But I think that's more about lack of knowledge rather than anything else.

It's also dismissive of a million different types of art and expression that don't have the benefit of this type of platform. Art and its value is always intertwined with artist. Is art diminished when it's known that the artist did it only to get paid?

I want universal basic income just so the most artistic and interesting of us can go and try cool innovative stuff without fear of death.

IMO open source thrived is also driven by the ZIRP era boom. Lots of engineers who made bank and lots of free time (basically self manifested UBI) were free to take risks and create things without worrying about the basics.

It is the most successful UBI experiment.

Now that the gravy train is over, I suspect open source projects will suffer and will increasingly be at the mercy of corporate funding or VCs.

I see more companies supporting FOSS. Maybe not through direct funding, but with code contributions. You do need a bit of both.

Artistic and interesting is highly subjective and definitely not universal, thus it is best handled by the market approach.

I mean what’s going on right now IS the market approach. And it’s why artists are revolting.

Before that, it said: "Others such as pop-rock songwriter Caroline Rose are experimenting too. Her album Year of the Slug came out only on vinyl and Bandcamp, inspired by Cindy Lee’s Diamond Jubilee, which was initially available only on YouTube and the filesharing site Mega." So her inspiration was someone distributing for free online. The whole article has the feel of an anarcho get together with half the participants stoned.

lol - wouldn't be surprised.