If I call you a thief without proof, you cannot disprove that. Luckily, in civilised world, you are presumed to be innocent until proven guilty.
One who is claiming that wrongdoing occurred has to prove that it occurred. It is not upon the one who is accused to prove his innocence.
Look up the concept of burden of proof.
Prove it.
The only thing with streaming i could argue against streaming is it kinda really screws the artists. The user it isnt really a matter of anything ethical or particularly wrong with it but for the artists it bamboozles the money they make.
Streaming makes being an artist and making a living off it harder.
Streaming platforms arent far above this
thank you so much for writing it thats what I meant
to start with around steaming
Being an artist on spotify be like 
I think it’s impossible to debate something with someone who thinks streaming services are immoral, whilst also arguing FOR piracy.
Oddly though, look what popped up on the BBC website just now:
bUt It HuRtS nO-oNe.
I think that’s more illustrative of piracy rather than streaming tbh 
Sorry, I can’t view your link, because I do not consent to tracking cookies from BBC. Please archive a copy of it, if you want me to read it.
According to Kresimir, Piracy works far better! 
Nope, Kresimir never argued that robbing ships and killing crewmen is beneficial for artists. That is just libel.
Streaming isnt too much above it tbh, Spotify and the like make much more off the music than they give the artists.
Lets say for instance they make 1$ per streamed song (idk the actual #), they only give the artist about 10cents for that. 1/10th is basically robbing the artist in exchange for a commonly used platform. Indie artists couldnt hope to make a living on spotify, itd be impossible at this rate.
Im not advocating piracy, but arguing “its better than piracy” isnt a good retort and doesnt help folks who want to be musical artists not get screwed because the only evil your avoiding is your own conscience not them getting bamboozled.
EDIT: and thats not even how spotify works btw, the less youre streamed the less you make as its all from a single pool that they get paid.
I know English isn’t your first language Kresimir, but c’mon, you’re flogging a dead horse with that particular semantical joke.
See 3a:
I am aware of that definition, and I am telling you that it is a slanderous one.
The word has been redefined intentionally to turn people who share into the moral equivalents of people who plunder, steal, and murder.
It’s an extremely offensive term. In my opinion, using the word “pirate” for someone who is, in fact, not a pirate, but simply makes and distributes copies of something, thus harming no one in the process, is as bad as the using the worst racial slurs.
If I listen to a particular artist on repeat, they’re making money each and every time I stream a specific track.
No, it’s not a huge amount, but it’s demonstrably much more than they’d get if I pirated all of their music.
No, they dont lol
thats the issue
Would you prefer to just be called a thief then?
I dont think I can agree here
I know a few indie artists and if people just started sharing their music instead of buying it from them it would hurt them significantly
How can you know that? How can you know that, in the absence of sharing their music online, more people would buy it? Can you somehow see into alternative realities?
I can imagine a situation where more people would buy their music if it was shared for free online. But neither you nor I can know that.
How very dare you sir!?
We’re people of faith.
btw, look at how ridiculous it was…
DIRTY PIRATES…Hijacking airwaves to broadcast jungle / breakbeat music on their will without consulting authorities… 
I have never stolen anything in my life. So, I take offence at that.
