[_jal]

> It seems like you are implying I am.

You are here talking down the tool and implying software you have not used is not legal while uncritically repeating their claims, which are more aggressive than many copyright lawyers believe is accurate.

I'm sorry if you find my flip characterization uncharitable. If you need a less off-the-cuff one, you are uncritically lending your voice to the legacy copyright cartel's continuing attempts to monopolize music distribution.

That does do several things. Promoting fairness for musicians is not one of them.

[tchaffee]

> you are uncritically lending your voice to the legacy copyright cartel's continuing attempts to monopolize music distribution.

Especially when I said this, right? "If there is a service that pays musicians directly and cuts out ASCAP and RIAA, then even better."

[_jal]

OK, that does require an apology; I missed that, and it does change the tenor of your argument. It is unclear to me how to combine supporting musicians' abusers with supporting musicians, but this is not a productive conversation, so I'm dropping it.