The Avett Brothers 'I And Love And You' album disappeared?

[SommerLeann]

I was not happy to come in to work this morning unable to play my favorite album on spotify; The Avett Brothers "I And Love And You". What are you doing spotify??? It is one thing if it was never available in the first place, but to take it away after I had it? Now that's just cruel...

[bhamjoel]

I blame Spotify for this but I also blame Avett Brothers, their management and their record company(s).  I've let Spotify know what I think here, now I'll let Avett Brothers & co know how I feel by emailing the record company and letting them know I'll neither be attending Avett concerts nor buying any Avett merchandise until they decide Spotify listeners deserve their entire catalog.  As long as these record companies continue pushing us around by screwing with online services like Spotify, well, this is the response they'll get from me.  I'm not leaving all the great music here for $10/month just because a few dozen albums I'd like to hear are unavailable.  I'll continue to support this model.  To do otherwise and go steal music would just play into the record companies' hands if I were caught.  I work at a law office and a lady just paid a $4200 settlement to record companies due to her daughter stealing.  Plus, I don't have all that time.  As for "the man", it might be wise to consider possibility that "the man" in this case just might be The Avett Brothers themselves.  Musicians, in general, are not known for their incredible fiscal responsibilty, and they often do "sell out" and create issues just like this one. 

[vxxzy]

I don't recall anyone here stating they would 'steal' music as an alternative to Spotify. I am not sure where this came into play. I do know that 'stealing' is not necessarily the correct word...

Individuals infringe the copyright of the copyright holder when they download from unlicensed sources. The copyright holder can decide who is licensed to redistribute rights to their content. They can decide the details of that license. iTunes, Amazon, etc... are examples of 'licensed' re-distributors. They have permission to sell rights to the copyright holders content. Really when you 'purchase music'... You don't own the actual music... You don't own the song...You own a license that descirbes your rights to the music (ex. Right to listen). The rights holder ultimately decides what you can and can't do with that license. Soooo really you are not 'stealing' music... You are infringing copyright.... And to the rights holders... You are stealing potential profit... The argument.. "If you did not have the ability to download it illegally, you would have purchased it". I still do not quite understand how you can 'steal' something that has yet to exist. Potential profit is not actual profit. Sure! You can grab a bunch of statisticians, pay them very well, and they will find a way to prove it. There are simply to many variables to prove it to a reasonably verifiable degree.

I say all the above so that many here will understand how the present system operates. It was a great system for the rights holder when they were able to control delivery of their content (CDs, Cassette, etc...). Now that we have the Oh-So-Great Internet, the rights holders feel they have lost control of their content. They will continue to feel this way until they make a change to their business model; the one already described.

I do not feel that Spotify is the best way to fix the current system. I believe the system can only be fixed by those who create the content. The record labels, in conjunction with Artists, create content therefore; they are the one who can fix the system. Spotify aims to provide the rights holders with an alternative medium; a medium that can allow the record labels to exert more control over their content. With the old system, you could be guaranteed that as long as you had the encoded/stored audio (CD, cassette, mp3), your right to listen to the music could not be taken away.

Spotify has done little to convince me that I will always have access to the music I enjoy. Spotify, through their service, has not provided me a guarantee that the music I enjoy today, will be available tomorrow. I feel less convinced, with the recent unavailability of my favorite artist. Sure their is a large catalog... If you can stand the possibility of losing 1, 2, or 1000 songs you enjoy, are happy with available alternatives, and don't mind losing a few freedoms, more power to ya! You may say: "If you really don't want to lose your music and are that concerned, go buy it". At this point we would be back to the old model. I orginally subscribed to Spotify because I believed they could change the system. I am holding my subscription to Spotify until they, or another company, can provide me a way to listen to music I enjoy without limiting my freedom. We all know corporations can be greedy. Down the road, Spotify (out of financial necessity) could start locking popular Tracks or Artist, and only make them available through other more expensive tiered subscriptions. It has been done in several other industries (gaming, etc..). I know... This is speculation... I have yet to be convinced that this will not happen. I do not want to use an alternative medium (Spotify) that further limits my freedom. This is why I no longer use Spotify: Until I can be provided a way to listen to music I enjoy, without limiting my freedom, I will stick with the older system. It at least afforded me the freedom to listen to music, whenever I wanted to, without fear that it may be gone tomorrow.

-edit for grammar and minor clarification

[karina11]

i love song