| > Okay, but I don't get what type of innovations - other than AI chatbots, and I mention this with a huge asterisk because all people are asking for is for these trillion dollar corporations to pay the people who's work they're benefiting from - are being stifled right now? Software, music, graphics are all subject to substantial restrictions on new works because of copyright. You don't even notice it because it's become so normalized. > Sure there'll be a chunk of people out there still creating things because they want to create things, but they also have to put food on the table at the end of the day 95%+ of musicians don't make money from music distribution, they make it from performances when touring. Eliminating copyright would have no impact on this. It's the same reason open source developers can still feed their families. Graphic artists would still be commissioned for custom works, although AI will now eat into that too somewhat. Many, many people would continue to write, compose and create art despite no financial incentives. Just look at all of the fanfiction and fan art out there. > Who'd wanna pay for that, if you can just download the music yourself? You absolutely could, but people often pay for extra convenience: an easily searchable index, music recommendations, playlists that can sync across devices, and so on. > You're literally describing a commercial enterprise here, I'm more describing an almost non-profit that provides a convenient interface. Spotify isn't just charging for hosting, it also has to pay licensing fees for music rights and profit margins for investors. Neither of those factor into this new fictional world we're discussing. I'm not sure why this OSS version of Spotify has to be "innovative", the innovation is the low cost access to all of humanity's musical creations. Copyright was intended to advance progress in the arts and sciences, but it's honestly doing the opposite, and has been for quite some time. |