Time, ultimately, will tell, but in your humble opinion, has Mr Young recently misread the zeitgeist like Lars did in the late 90s?

Hard to be objective since Lars and Joe Rogan are both firmly on the side of Evil.

It’s hard to say ‘yes’ to the question because the situations are different and their responses were very different (Neil is not suing Spotify for $10,000,000).

That being said, I find Neil boycotting Spotify like this to be a little peculiar. There are abhorrent folks on any platform and the same reason could be used to boycott other platforms as well. Why Spotify, and why now?

I have no love for Spotify and think there are plenty of other valid reasons to not use it. Maybe Neil has other unspoken reasons for doing what he did.

Regardless, Neil can do whatever he wants. Boycott away.

…and considering Spotify has already taken actions to address his concerns, certainly cannot question the boycott’s effectiveness.

biscuitdough wrote: Tue Feb 01, 2022 2:29 pm Hard to be objective since Lars and Joe Rogan are both firmly on the side of Evil.

Truth. Lars even collects art.

Lars tried to stop illegal distribution of published IP. Neil is trying to leverage the demand for his IP to influence the ethical responsibility of a platform he uses to sell his IP based on his dislike and opposition to the IP of another "artist" selling their IP on the same service.

Not really similar at all.

Neil ditching Spotify because of Rogan (while promoting and celebrating Amazon and Apple streaming platforms by name) doesn't seem that similar to the Lars thing.

Lars totally sucks, but Lars had a point. He wasn't wrong in principal. The kinda fight he started is part of what lead to platforms having to pay artists for streaming, and the idea that P2P trading of IP is actual theft, which it is. Even if it isn't perfect.

Neil has a point, but it is a personal point not a legal point. He doesn't like Rogans content, and chooses not not be hosted on a service that supports that douche chillery. He, being the believer of the power of protest that he is, probably hopes others will jump ship too, impacting Spotify's pockets, but probably won't work. Part of the deal with Rogan (that was monstrous and expensive) guaranteed he could release whatever content he wanted with little intervention from Spotify. If they break that agreement, I would imagine Rogan walks away with the rights to his show, a bag of fucking money, leaving Spotify with... Neil Young happier. My guess is their will be a finger waving publicly given to Rogan, behind the scenes, bigwigs will all laugh and say "Keep up the good work" and nothing will come of it.

Kniferide wrote: Tue Feb 01, 2022 4:00 pm Lars totally sucks, but Lars had a point. He wasn't wrong in principal.

That may be true, but the perception of "millionaire rock star going after his own fans" was WAY more damaging than what Neil is currently doing.

penningtron wrote: Tue Feb 01, 2022 4:39 pm

Kniferide wrote: Tue Feb 01, 2022 4:00 pm Lars totally sucks, but Lars had a point. He wasn't wrong in principal.

That may be true, but the perception of "millionaire rock star going after his own fans" was WAY more damaging than what Neil is currently doing.

I referencing his run against Napster. Personal lawsuits and action for that kinda stuff are in pretty poor taste for sure. Don't get me wrong, I think he handled it terribly and is a turd of a man, as well as a pretty lack luster drummer, but he, at least DID have a legal leg to stand on. Spotify hasn't really broken any laws so its a really different fight. I totally support Neil Youngs perspective and he has every right to pull his content to make a point, but it is mostly based on opinion more than legality.

“Did NY take a principled stand” is a different question than “Did NY misread the zeitgeist.”

I don’t think he misread the zeitgeist. Spotify is one product among many now, and opting out of it won’t turn out, fifty years from now, to have been a naive decision.