Who would you give that power to though? And can you be sure that the people you give it to will agree with you on everything that should and shouldn't be allowed?
'Fuck tha police' talks about slaughtering cops, using sniper rifles to take them out, a bloodbath of cops dying and so on. Can you trust that a company that says it will remove all music that incites violence and hatred to allow such a song to be available online?
Can you trust that once a company has set a policy of removing things that incite violence and hatred that other people won't come along and petition to have such songs removed on those grounds?
I might not like that song but I'm not going to try and ban it, because I accept that it's ok for people to like things I personally find distasteful. If I don't like it, I have the freedom to choose not to listen to it.
I am worried though when I hear companies talk about banning things with such large umbrella terms that can be arbitrarily enforced.
Every person or entity called in to relay material that isn't a regulated utility, arm of the state, common carriers, or otherwise deprived of or restrained in the exercise of free speech rights.
Who decides on what is and isn't trash?
The article states "And music streaming services offered by Google, Deezer and Spotify have said they would remove music that incites violence, hatred or racism."
Does this mean they will remove things like 'Fuck tha police' or 'Smack my bitch up'?
I don't like such music and would consider it trash, it also falls quite clearly under inciting violence and hatred.
As much as I don't like that music though, I like even less having a handful of companies being the arbiters of what content is and isn't available.