News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:We've failed: open access is winning and we must change o... by mbrock on Saturday September 16, 2017 @03:49PM (#15266379)
It also seems interesting to imagine a system or volunteer driven piracy that ends up giving artists a bigger cut than the Spotify model, which mostly gives them a pittance.

There's a huge crisis of compensation for "content creators", and Spotify does not seem like the hundred year solution. Especially seeing how it keeps maintaining an artificial distinction between producers and consumers and acts as a filter for what counts as music.

Re:We've failed: open access is winning and we must change o... by paulryanrogers on Saturday September 16, 2017 @06:34PM (#15267120)
The Spotify model is arguably more successful _because_ they pay artists so little. I don't buy music much anymore. Pandora and Spotify satisfy most of my desire for it.
Re:We've failed: open access is winning and we must change o... by coldtea on Saturday September 16, 2017 @06:49PM (#15267185)
>The Spotify model is arguably more successful _because_ they pay artists so little.

That's a non sequitur.

Re:We've failed: open access is winning and we must change o... by dragandj on Saturday September 16, 2017 @07:36PM (#15267348)
I guess the meaning is that Spotify can offer low subscription price because it pays little to the authors. Seems quite logical to me.