Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Feb 08, 2019, 7:30 PM UTC

cabaalis wrote: post #459

kgwxd wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never used this phrase in my entire life but it seems absolutely perfect for the described scenario. Sorry not sorry. I personally chose not to use Spotify at all, but I'm not going to fault anyone for using it with a thrid-party blocker. Even if Spotify didn't also do advertising the right way (e.g. branded playlists (I believe paying users get those too)), no one is obligated to subject themselves to personal…

I believe it's safe to assume that (1) You sell a product or service for which people pay you, or (2) You derive an income working for someone else that sells a product or service for which people pay, or that (3) You receive financial support from someone who is within one of the above. What happens to the food on your table when people take that product or service without giving you money for it?

Post by EpicEng » Fri, Feb 08, 2019, 7:32 PM UTC

mlthoughts2018 wrote: post #607

beering wrote: post #514

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm frankly surprised at the level of entitlement that you and others are operating under. Section 8 and 9 of the Spotify T&C is what you are looking for, btw.

I’m frankly surprised you believe terms of service regarding a data stream that a company chooses to freely emit are in any way related whatsoever to a person’s right to restrict what is displayed on a physical device that they own. My screen is not Spotify’s property. They are allowed to TRY to display something on it, and it will only be displayed IF I LET THEM. There’s no discussion here.

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Feb 08, 2019, 7:34 PM UTC

DoctorPenguin wrote: post #497

josteink wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or pay for your account?

Today I could easily afford that. But thinking back a few decades when I was young and didn't have much money at my disposal I would say using stuff for free isn't that bad. Especially when piracy is so much easier than getting your account suspended for using an adblocker.

Post by blue4 » Fri, Feb 08, 2019, 7:37 PM UTC

cletus wrote: post #255

Good. Spotify has a pretty cheap paid option that removes all of that. To those who justify wanting the paid service for nothing by saying Spotify won't "take responsibility" or "assume liability" for their ads or those ads "might deliver malware" or are "intrusive" as a weak rationalization, you present a false dichotomy. There are at least three options: 1. Pay for the service 2. Suffer through the ads 3. Don't use…

Post by zeeZ » Fri, Feb 08, 2019, 7:39 PM UTC

macd wrote: post #246

wolco wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Netflix offers too much value for a small amount plus the size of movies makes downloading/previewing the throwaway type of netflix shows make it hard to justify the effort to pirate. Spotify always seems less useful compared to winamp if you knew what music you liked or like to download everything from one band who's best days are behind them. A hassle for new stuff but if you want the all of the 'yes' albums the ra…

A happy medium for me is google play music. Basically the same song selection and features as spotify, plus the ability to upload your own mp3s that aren't available on the platform (I actually haven't used this feature in a while, but it seems like it still works). And you get ad-free youtube as well.